Hip resurfacing arthroplasty: short-term survivorship of 4,401 hips from the Finnish Arthroplasty Register

Background and purpose Population-based registry data from the Nordic Arthroplasty Register Association (NARA) and from the National Joint Register of England and Wales have revealed that the outcome after hip resurfacing arthroplasty (HRA) is inferior to that of conventional total hip arthroplasty (THA). We analyzed the short-term survival of 4,401 HRAs in the Finnish Arthroplasty Register.

Methods We compared the revision risk of the 4,401 HRAs from the Register to that of 48,409 THAs performed during the same time period. The median follow-up time was 3.5 (0–9) years for HRAs and 3.9 (0–9) years for THAs.

Results There was no statistically significant difference in revision risk between HRAs and THAs (RR = 0.93, 95% CI: 0.78–1.10). Female patients had about double the revision risk of male patients (RR = 2.0, CI: 1.4–2.7). Hospitals that had performed 100 or more HRA procedures had a lower revision risk than those with less than 100 HRAs (RR = 0.6, CI: 0.4–0.9). Articular Surface Replacement (ASR, DePuy) had inferior outcome with higher revision risk than the Birmingham Hip Resurfacing implant (BHR, Smith & Nephew), the reference implant (RR = 1.8, CI: 1.2–2.7).

Interpretation We found that HRA had comparable short-term survivorship to THA at a nationwide level. Implant design had an influence on revision rates. ASR had higher revision risk. Low hospital procedure volume worsened the outcome of HRA. Female patients had twice the revision risk of male patients.     

Reverse hybrid total hip arthroplasty

Background and purpose — The use of a cemented cup together with an uncemented stem in total hip arthroplasty (THA) has become popular in Norway and Sweden during the last decade. The results of this prosthetic concept, reverse hybrid THA, have been sparsely described. The Nordic Arthroplasty Register Association (NARA) has already published 2 papers describing results of reverse hybrid THAs in different age groups. Based on data collected over 2 additional years, we wanted to perform in depth analyses of not only the reverse hybrid concept but also of the different cup/stem combinations used.

Patients and methods — From the NARA, we extracted data on reverse hybrid THAs from January 1, 2000 until December 31, 2013. 38,415 such hips were studied and compared with cemented THAs. The Kaplan-Meier method and Cox regression analyses were used to estimate the prosthesis survival and the relative risk of revision. The main endpoint was revision for any reason. We also performed specific analyses regarding the different reasons for revision and analyses regarding the cup/stem combinations used in more than 500 cases.

Results — We found a higher rate of revision for reverse hybrids than for cemented THAs, with an adjusted relative risk of revision (RR) of 1.4 (95% CI: 1.3–1.5). At 10 years, the survival rate was 94% (CI: 94–95) for cemented THAs and 92% (95% CI: 92–93) for reverse hybrids. The results for the reverse hybrid THAs were inferior to those for cemented THAs in patients aged 55 years or more (RR =1.1, CI: 1.0–1.3; p < 0.05). We found a higher rate of early revision due to periprosthetic femoral fracture for reverse hybrids than for cemented THAs in patients aged 55 years or more (RR =3.1, CI: 2.2–4.5; p < 0.001).

Interpretation — Reverse hybrid THAs had a slightly higher rate of revision than cemented THAs in patients aged 55 or more. The difference in survival was mainly caused by a higher incidence of early revision due to periprosthetic femoral fracture in the reversed hybrid THAs.     

Design-related risk factors for revision of primary cemented stems

Background and purpose Even small design variables of the femoral stem may influence the outcome of a hip arthroplasty. We investigated whether design-related factors play any role in the risk of non-aseptic revision of the 3 most frequently used primary cemented stem designs in the Swedish Hip Arthroplasty Register.

Patients and methods We studied 71,184 primary cemented femoral stem implants (21,008 Exeter polished stems, 43,036 Lubinus SPII stems, and 7,140 Spectron EF Primary stems) that were inserted from 1999 through 2006. Design-specific characteristics were analyzed using separate Cox regression models that were adjusted for sex, age, diagnosis, incision, and number of operations (first vs. second).

Results The crude revision rate varied between 0.8% (Lubinus SPII) and 1.4% (Spectron Primary). For the Exeter stem, the smallest femoral head diameter (22 mm) was associated with a higher risk of revision. No other design-specific parameters influenced the risk of revision of the Exeter stem. The smallest Lubinus stem size, a stem with extended neck length combined with a femoral head with increasing neck length, or the use of a cobalt-chromium head had a negative influence on the outcome. For the Spectron stem, the risk of revision was elevated for the smallest stem and for increasing offset calculated as the combined effect of high offset design and increasing neck length.

Interpretation Overall revision rates were low, but for two of the stems studied design factors such as size and neck length or offset influenced the risk of non-aseptic revision.     

The type of surgical approach influences the risk of revision in total hip arthroplasty

Background and purpose The most common surgical approaches in total hip arthroplasty in Sweden are the posterior and the anterolateral transgluteal approach. Currently, however, there is insufficient evidence to prefer one over the other regarding risk of subsequent surgery.

Patients and methods We searched the Swedish Hip Arthroplasty Register between the years 1992 and 2009 to compare the posterior and anterolateral transgluteal approach regarding risk of revision in the 3 most common all-cemented hip prosthesis designs in Sweden. 90,662 total hip replacements met the inclusion criteria. We used Cox regression analysis for estimation of prosthesis survival and relative risk of revision due to dislocation, infection, or aseptic loosening.

Results Our results show that for the Lubinus SPII prosthesis and the Spectron EF Primary prosthesis, the anterolateral transgluteal approach gave an increased risk of revision due to aseptic loosening (relative risk (RR) = 1.3, 95% CI: 1.0–1.6 and RR = 1.6, CI: 1.0–2.5) but a reduced risk of revision due to dislocation (RR = 0.7, CI: 0.5–0.8 and RR = 0.3, CI: 0.1–0.4). For the Exeter Polished prosthesis, the surgical approach did not affect the outcome for dislocation or aseptic loosening. The surgical approach had no influence on the risk of revision due to infection in any of these designs.

Interpretation This observational study shows that the surgical approach affected the risk of revision due to aseptic loosening and dislocation for 2 of the most commonly used cemented implants in Sweden. Further studies are needed to determine whether these results are generalizable to other implants and to uncemented fixation.     

18 years of results with cemented primary hip prostheses in the Norwegian Arthroplasty Register: Concerns about some newer implants

Background and purpose Few studies have compared the long-term survival of cemented primary total hip arthroplasties (THAs), and several prostheses have been used without adequate knowledge of their endurance. We studied long-term outcome based on data in the Norwegian Arthroplasty Register.Patients and methods The 10 most used prosthesis brands in 62,305 primary Palacos or Simplex cemented THAs reported to the Register from 1987 through 2007 were included. Survival analyses with revision as endpoint (for any cause or for aseptic loosening) were performed using Kaplan-Meier and multiple Cox regression with time-dependent covariates. Revision rate ratios (RRs) were estimated for the follow-up intervals: 0–5, 6–10, and > 10 years.Results 5 prosthesis brands (cup/stem combinations) (Charnley, Exeter, Titan, Spectron/ITH, Link IP/Lubinus SP; n = 24,728) were investigated with 0–20 year follow-up (inserted 1987–1997). After 18 years, 11% (95% CI: 10.6–12.1) were revised for any cause and 8.4% (7.7–9.1) for aseptic loosening. Beyond 10 years of follow-up, the Charnley cup had a lower revision rate due to aseptic loosening than Exeter (RR = 1.8) and Spectron (RR = 2.4) cups. For stems, beyond 10 years we did not find statistically significant differences comparing Charnley with Titan, ITH, and SP stems, but the Exeter stem had better results (RR = 0.5). 10 prosthesis brands (9 cups in combination with 6 stems; n = 37,577) were investigated with 0–10 years of follow-up (inserted from 1998 through 2007). The Charnley cup had a lower revision rate due to aseptic loosening than all cups except the IP. Beyond 5 years follow-up, the Reflection All-Poly cup had a 14 times higher revision rate. For stems, beyond 5 years the Spectron-EF (RR = 6.1) and Titan (RR = 5.5) stems had higher revision rates due to aseptic loosening than Charnley. The analyses also showed a marked improvement in Charnley results between the periods 1987–1997 and 1998–2007.Interpretation We observed clinically important differences between cemented prosthesis brands and identified inferior results for previously largely undocumented prostheses, including the commonly used prosthesis combination Reflection All-Poly/Spectron-EF. The results were, however, satisfactory according to international standards.     

Low revision rate after total hip arthroplasty in patients with pediatric hip diseases

Background The results of primary total hip arthroplasties (THAs) after pediatric hip diseases such as developmental dysplasia of the hip (DDH), slipped capital femoral epiphysis (SCFE), or Perthes’ disease have been reported to be inferior to the results after primary osteoarthritis of the hip (OA).

Materials and methods We compared the survival of primary THAs performed during the period 1995–2009 due to previous DDH, SCFE, Perthes’ disease, or primary OA, using merged individual-based data from the Danish, Norwegian, and Swedish arthroplasty registers, called the Nordic Arthroplasty Register Association (NARA). Cox multiple regression, with adjustment for age, sex, and type of fixation of the prosthesis was used to calculate the survival of the prostheses and the relative revision risks.

Results 370,630 primary THAs were reported to these national registers for 1995–2009. Of these, 14,403 THAs (3.9%) were operated due to pediatric hip diseases (3.1% for Denmark, 8.8% for Norway, and 1.9% for Sweden) and 288,435 THAs (77.8%) were operated due to OA. Unadjusted 10-year Kaplan-Meier survival of THAs after pediatric hip diseases (94.7% survival) was inferior to that after OA (96.6% survival). Consequently, an increased risk of revision for hips with a previous pediatric hip disease was seen (risk ratio (RR) 1.4, 95% CI: 1.3–1.5). However, after adjustment for differences in sex and age of the patients, and in fixation of the prostheses, no difference in survival was found (93.6% after pediatric hip diseases and 93.8% after OA) (RR 1.0, CI: 1.0–1.1). Nevertheless, during the first 6 postoperative months more revisions were reported for THAs secondary to pediatric hip diseases (RR 1.2, CI: 1.0–1.5), mainly due to there being more revisions for dislocations (RR 1.8, CI: 1.4–2.3). Comparison between the different diagnosis groups showed that the overall risk of revision after DDH was higher than after OA (RR 1.1, CI: 1.0–1.2), whereas the combined group Perthes’ disease/SCFE did not have a significantly different risk of revision to that of OA (RR 0.9, CI: 0.7–1.0), but had a lower risk than after DDH (RR 0.8, CI: 0.7–1.0).

Interpretation After adjustment for differences in age, sex, and type of fixation of the prosthesis, no difference in risk of revision was found for primary THAs performed due to pediatric hip diseases and those performed due to primary OA.     

Clinical Outcomes and Midterm Survivorship of an Uncemented Primary Total Hip Arthroplasty System

BackgroundThe rise in total hip arthroplasty (THA) has led to a concomitant increase in revision THAs. Tracking implant performance therefore remains a significant element of scientific inquiry to garner and maintain public trust in this procedure. There are few available reports of outcomes of a single manufacturer’s total hip system outside registry data.MethodsWe performed a retrospective review of a prospectively generated database to evaluate outcomes of a single manufacturer’s femoral stem and acetabular shell for THA. We report the functional outcomes, revision data, and survivorship for this total hip system.ResultsA total of 1942 primary THAs were implanted into 1672 patients. There were of 57 revisions. There were no cases of acetabular failure at 10-year follow-up. All functional outcome scores demonstrated significant improvements following THA. Kaplan-Meier survival analysis for all-cause revisions demonstrated 2-year implant survival of 97.6% (95% confidence interval [CI], 96.9-98.3), 5-year implant survival of 97.3% (95% CI, 96.5-98.1), and 10-year implant survival of 97.0% (95% CI, 96.0-98.0). When infection was excluded, implant survivorship improved to 99.2% (95% CI, 98.8-99.6) at 2 years, 98.9% (95% CI, 98.5-99.4) at 5 years, and 98.7% (95% CI, 98.1-99.4) at 10 years.ConclusionThis THA implant system comprising an uncemented press-fit acetabulum used alongside a triple-tapered femoral stem is an excellent option for THA. Implant survivorship at 2, 5, and 10 years is among the best reported for any total hip system in the world.     

Poor 10-year survivorship of hip resurfacing arthroplasty

Background and purpose — In a previous registry report, short-term implant survival of hip resurfacing arthroplasty (HRA) in Finland was found to be comparable to that of total hip arthroplasty (THA). Since then, it has become evident that adverse reactions to metal debris (ARMDs) may also be associated with HRA, not only with large-diameter head metal-on-metal THA. The aim of the study was to assess medium- to long-term survivorship of HRA based on the Finnish Arthroplasty Register (FAR).

Patients and methods — 5,068 HRAs performed during the period 2001–2013 in Finland were included. Kaplan-Meier survival analysis was used to calculate survival probabilities and their 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Cox multiple regression, with adjustment for age, sex, diagnosis, femoral head size, and hospital volume was used to analyze implant survival of HRA devices with revision for any reason as endpoint. The reference group consisted of 6,485 uncemented Vision/Bimetric and ABG II THAs performed in Finland over the same time period.

Results — The 8-year survival, with any revision as an endpoint, was 93% (CI: 92–94) for Birmingham Hip Resurfacing (BHR), 86% (CI: 78–94) for Corin, 91% (CI: 89–94) for ReCap, 92% (CI: 89–96) for Durom, and was 72% (CI: 69–76) for the Articular Surface Replacement (ASR). The 10-year survival, with any revision as an endpoint, for reference THAs was 92% (CI: 91–92) and for all HRAs it was 86% (CI: 84–87%). Female HRA patients had about twice the revision risk of male patients. ASR had an inferior outcome: the revision risk was 4-fold higher than for BHR, the reference implant.

Interpretation — The 10-year implant survival of HRAs is 86% in Finland. According to new recommendations from NICE (The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence), an HRA/THA should have a revision rate of 5% or less at 10 years. None of the HRAs studied achieved this goal.     

Increased risk of intraoperative and early postoperative periprosthetic femoral fracture with uncemented stems

Background and purpose — The use of uncemented fixation in total hip arthroplasty (THA) is increasing. Registry studies have indicated an increased risk of revision of uncemented implants due to early periprosthetic femoral fracture. In this paper, we describe the incidence and predisposing factors for intraoperative and early postoperative (≤ 90 days) periprosthetic femoral fractures after cemented and uncemented THA.

Patients and methods — This was a prospective observational study in 8 Danish high-volume centers from February 2010 to November 2013. We used the 90-day follow-up from the Danish National Patient Registry and patient records. We obtained intraoperative information from the Danish Hip Arthroplasty Registry and from surgical notes.

Results — Of 7,169 primary consecutive THAs, 5,482 (77%) were performed using uncemented femoral components. The total incidence of periprosthetic femoral fractures ≤ 90 days postoperatively was 2.1% (n = 150). 70 fractures were detected intraoperatively (46 required osteosynthesis). 51 postoperatively detected fractures occurred without trauma (42 of which were reoperated) and 29 were postoperative fall-related fractures (27 of which were reoperated). 134 fractures (2.4%) were found in uncemented femoral components and 16 (0.9%) were found in cemented femoral components (p < 0.001). Uncemented femoral stem (relative risk (RR)?=?4.1, 95% CI: 2.3–7.2), medically treated osteoporosis (RR =2.8, CI: 1.6–4.8), female sex (RR =1.6, CI: 1.1–2.2), and age (RR =1.4 per 10 years, CI: 1.2–1.6) were associated with increased risk of periprosthetic femoral fracture when analyzed using multivariable regression analysis.

Interpretation — Uncemented femoral components were associated with an increased risk of early periprosthetic femoral fractures, especially in elderly, female, and osteoporotic patients.     

Comparison of the risk of revision in cementless total hip arthroplasty with ceramic-on-ceramic and metal-on-polyethylene bearings

Background and purpose — Ceramic-on-ceramic (CoC) bearings were introduced in total hip arthroplasty (THA) to reduce problems related to polyethylene wear. We compared the 9-year revision risk for cementless CoC THA and for cementless metal-on-polyethylene (MoP) THA.

Patients and methods — In this prospective, population-based study from the Danish Hip Arthroplasty Registry, we identified all the primary cementless THAs that had been performed from 2002 through 2009 (n = 25,656). Of these, 1,773 THAs with CoC bearings and 9,323 THAs with MoP bearings were included in the study. To estimate the relative risk (RR) of revision, we used regression with the pseudo-value approach and treated death as a competing risk.

Results — 444 revisions were identified: 4.0% for CoC THA (71 of 1,773) and 4.0% for MoP THA (373 of 9,323). No statistically significant difference in the risk of revision for any reason was found for CoC and MoP bearings after 9 years of follow-up (adjusted RR = 1.3, 95% CI: 0.72–2.4). Revision rates due to component failure were 0.5% (n = 8) for CoC bearings and 0.1% (n = 6) for MoP bearings (p < 0.001). 6 patients with CoC bearings (0.34%) underwent revision due to ceramic fracture.

Interpretation — When compared to the “standard” MoP bearings, CoC THA had a 33% higher (though not statistically significantly higher) risk of revision for any reason at 9 years.     

Increased risk of revision in patients with non-traumatic femoral head necrosis

Background and purpose Previous studies of patients who have undergone total hip arthroplasty (THA) due to femoral head necrosis (FHN) have shown an increased risk of revision compared to cases with primary osteoarthritis (POA), but recent studies have suggested that this procedure is not associated with poor outcome. We compared the risk of revision after operation with THA due to FHN or POA in

the Nordic Arthroplasty Register Association (NARA) database including Denmark, Finland, Norway, and Sweden.

Patients and methods 427,806 THAs performed between 1995 and 2011 were included. The relative risk of revision for any reason, for aseptic loosening, dislocation, deep infection, and periprosthetic fracture was studied before and after adjustment for covariates using Cox regression models.

Results 416,217 hips with POA (mean age 69 (SD 10), 59% females) and 11,589 with FHN (mean age 65 (SD 16), 58% females) were registered. The mean follow-up was 6.3 (SD 4.3) years. After 2 years of observation, 1.7% in the POA group and 3.0% in the FHN group had been revised. The corresponding proportions after 16 years of observation were 4.2% and 6.1%, respectively. The 16-year survival in the 2 groups was 86% (95% CI: 86–86) and 77% (CI: 74–80). After adjusting for covariates, the relative risk (RR) of revision for any reason was higher in patients with FHN for both periods studied (up to 2 years: RR = 1.44, 95% CI: 1.34–1.54; p < 0.001; and 2–16 years: RR = 1.25, 1.14–1.38; p < 0.001).

Interpretation Patients with FHN had an overall increased risk of revision. This increased risk persisted over the entire period of observation and covered more or less all of the 4 most common reasons for revision.     

Use of diuretics and risk of implant failure after primary total hip arthroplasty: A nationwide population-based study

IntroductionThiazid and loop diuretics have been associated with changes in bone mineral density and fracture risk. However, data on survival of prosthesis implants are lacking. We evaluated the association between diuretic use and the risk of revision after primary total hip arthroplasty (THA).Materials and methodsWe conducted a nationwide population-based case-control study using medical databases in Denmark. In the Danish Hip Arthroplasty Registry, we identified 2491 cases that were revised after primary THA in the period 1995–2005 and who could be matched on age, gender and year of primary operation with 4943 non-revised THA controls. By means of conditional logistic regression, we estimated the relative risk (RR) of revision due to all causes and due to specific causes according to postoperative use of thiazid and loop diuretic, respectively.ResultsThe 10-year cumulated implant revision rate in the underlying cohort of 57,575 THA procedures from the Danish Hip Arthroplasty Registry was 8.9% (95% CI: 8.4–9.4). Postoperative thiazid diuretic use was not associated with neither the overall risk of revision nor revision due to specific causes compared to non-use. Postoperative loop diuretic use was associated with an adjusted RR of revision of 1.14 (95% CI; 0.98–1.32) compared with non-use. The adjusted RR of revision due to deep infection and periprosthetic fracture in loop diuretic users was 1.71 (1.15–2.55) and 6.39 (1.84–22.21), respectively. Loop diuretic use was not associated with risk of revision due to aseptic loosening, dislocation or miscellaneous causes.DiscussionLoop diuretics but not thiazides may be associated with an increased risk of revision following primary THA. Further studies are warranted in order to confirm this finding and clarify the nature of the association.     

Total hip arthroplasty for rheumatoid arthritis in younger patients: 2,557 replacements in the Finnish Arthroplasty Register followed for 0–24 years

Background?The results of total hip arthroplasty (THA) in young patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) have been reported in only a few studies. On a nationwide level, the outcome of THA in these patients is unknown. We evaluated the population-based survival of THA in patients under 55 years of age with RA and factors affecting the survival.

Patients?Between 1980 and 2003, 2,557 primary THAs performed for RA in patients less than 55 years of age were reported to the Finnish Arthroplasty Register.

Results?Proximally circumferentially porous-coated uncemented stems had a 15-year survival rate of 89% (95% CI 83–94) with aseptic loosening as endpoint. The risk of stem revision due to aseptic loosening was higher with cemented stems than with proximally porouscoated uncemented stems implanted during the same period (RR 2.4; p < 0.001). In contrast, Cox regression analysis showed that the risk of cup revision was significantly higher for all uncemented cup concepts than for all-polyethylene cemented cups with any cup revision as endpoint. There were no significant differences in survival between the THR concepts.

Interpretations?Uncemented proximally circumferentially porous-coated stems and cemented all-poly-ethylene cups are currently the implants of choice for young patients with RA.     

The Effect of Electric Current on the Healing time of Crural Fractures

Background and purpose — Uncemented stems are increasingly used in revision hip arthroplasty, but only a few studies have analyzed the outcomes of uncemented and cemented revision stems in large cohorts of patients. We compared the results of uncemented and cemented revision stems.

Patients and methods — 1,668 uncemented and 1,328 cemented revision stems used in first-time revisions due to aseptic loosening between 1999 and 2016 were identified in the Swedish Hip Arthroplasty Register. Kaplan–Meier analysis was used to investigate unadjusted implant survival with re-revision for any reason as the primary outcome. Hazard ratios (HR) for the risk of re-revision were calculated using a Cox regression model adjusted for sex, age, head size, concomitant cup revision, surgical approach at primary and at index revision surgery, and indication for primary total hip arthroplasty.

Results — Unadjusted 10-year survival was 85% (95% CI 83–87) for uncemented and 88% (CI 86–90) for cemented revision stems. The adjusted HR for re-revision of uncemented revision stems during the first year after surgery was 1.3 (CI 1.0–1.6), from the second year the HR was 1.1 (CI 0.8–1.4). Uncemented stems were most often re-revised early due to infection and dislocation, whereas cemented stems were mostly re-revised later due to aseptic loosening.

Interpretation — Both uncemented and cemented revision stems had satisfactory long-term survival but they differed in their modes of failure. Our conclusions are limited by the fact that femoral bone defect size could not be investigated within the setting of the current study.     

The Charnley versus the Spectron hip prosthesis: clinical evaluation of a randomized, prospective study of 2 different hip implants.

Prospective, randomized studies must be performed when new surgical techniques or implants are evaluated. In this study, a new implant system was compared with the Charnley prosthesis, which over the years has been the most used hip implant in Sweden. Between 1985 and 1989, 410 hips were randomized to treatment with a Charnley or a Spectron total hip arthroplasty: 206 Charnley and 204 Spectron prostheses were implanted. The patients were operated on by a standardized procedure using a contemporary cementing technique. The patients were followed prospectively by an independent observer after 1, 3, 5 to 6, and 10 years. Harris Hip Score and patient satisfaction were recorded in the outcome evaluation. A total of 144 patients with 164 hips were deceased, and 15 patients (8 Charnley and 7 Spectron) have required a revision. Nine hips were revised because of aseptic loosening (5 Charnley stems and 4 Spectron metal-backed cups). The Charnley stem as well as the metal-backed Spectron cup had a higher risk for revision because of aseptic loosening. The Charnley ogee cup and the Spectron stem have performed remarkably well with no revision of these components. Seven Charnley prostheses dislocated, but no dislocation was recorded in the Spectron group. Survivorship calculations with a mean follow-up of 10 years revealed an overall 11-year survivorship of 94.5% +/- 3.4% (Charnley, 93.2% +/- 5.8%; Spectron, 95.9% +/- 3.0%). The clinical outcome did not differ between the 2 systems. The overall results in this old population, using a contemporary surgical technique, illustrate that cemented hip arthroplasty is an excellent treatment alternative for elderly patients.     

Prosthetic overhang is the most effective way to prevent scapular conflict in a reverse total shoulder prosthesis

Background and purpose?Controversies still exist about whether there is any effect of operative approach on survival of hip prostheses. We compared long-term survival of primary total hip arthroplasties in a welldefined study population from a national prospective population-based registry with regard to the three most commonly used surgical approaches.

Methods?We assessed prosthesis survival according to surgical approach (the lateral with or without trochanteric osteotomy, and the posterolateral) for 19,304 Charnley and 6,002 Exeter total hip arthroplasties performed from 1987 to 2004.

Results?For Charnley total hip arthroplasties, lateral approach with trochanteric osteotomy had a lower probability of revision than lateral approach without trochanteric osteotomy (RR = 0.6, 95% CI: 0.5–0.8). The lower revision rate was due to fewer revisions for aseptic loosening and dislocation. The differences had declined in the latest time period (1995–2004). We observed no differences between lateral approach without trochanteric osteotomy and posterolateral approach, except that there were more revisions due to dislocation in the posterolateral approach group (RR = 1.9, 95%CI: 1.1–3.2). No statistically significant differences were observed for Exeter total hip arthroplasties.

Interpretation?For Charnley prostheses, the lateral approach with trochanteric osteotomy gave a reduced revision risk compared to the other approaches, which was due to fewer revisions for dislocation, and in the first time period also fewer revisions due to aseptic loosening.     

Cause-Specific Stem Revision Risk in Primary Total Hip Arthroplasty Using Cemented vs Cementless Femoral Stem Fixation in a US Cohort

BackgroundWe sought to evaluate the cause-specific revision risk following hybrid (cemented stem mated to a cementless acetabular implant) vs cementless total hip arthroplasty (THA) in a US cohort.MethodsPrimary elective THA for osteoarthritis was identified using Kaiser Permanente’s Total Joint Replacement Registry (2001-2018). Multivariable Cox regression was used to evaluate cause-specific revision, including aseptic loosening, infection, instability, and periprosthetic fracture (PPF), for hybrid vs cementless THA. Analysis was stratified by age (<65, 65-74, and ≥75 years) and gender.ResultsThe study cohort comprised 88,830 THAs, including 4539 (5.1%) hybrid THAs. In stratified analysis, hybrid THA had a higher revision risk for loosening in females in all 3 age subgroups. A lower risk of revision for PPF was observed following hybrid THA in females aged ≥75 years. For females ≥75 years, cementless THA had an excess PPF risk of 0.9% while hybrid THA had an excess loosening risk of 0.2%, translating to a theoretical prevention of 10 PPF revisions but a price of 3 loosening revisions per 1000 hybrid THAs. No difference in revision risk was observed in males.ConclusionWe observed differences in cause-specific revision risks by method of stem fixation which depended upon patient age and gender. Although the trend toward all cementless fixation continue, there may be a role for hybrid fixation in females ≥75 years to mitigate risk for revision due to PPF at the potential cost of a slight increase in longer term aseptic loosening.Level of EvidenceLevel III.     

10-year results of the uncemented Allofit press-fit cup in young patients

Background and purpose — Uncemented acetabular components in primary total hip arthroplasty (THA) are commonly used today, but few studies have evaluated their survival into the second decade in young and active patients. We report on a minimum 10-year follow-up of an uncemented press-fit acetabular component that is still in clinical use.

Methods — We examined the clinical and radiographic results of our first 121 consecutive cementless THAs using a cementless, grit-blasted, non-porous, titanium alloy press-fit cup (Allofit; Zimmer Inc., Warsaw, IN) without additional screw fixation in 116 patients. Mean age at surgery was 51 (21–60) years. Mean time of follow-up evaluation was 11 (10–12) years.

Results — At final follow-up, 8 patients had died (8 hips), and 1 patient (1 hip) was lost to follow-up. 3 hips in 3 patients had undergone acetabular revision, 2 for deep infection and 1 for aseptic acetabular loosening. There were no impending revisions at the most recent follow-up. We did not detect periacetabular osteolysis or loosening on plain radiographs in those hips that were evaluated radiographically (n = 90; 83% of the hips available at a minimum of 10 years). Kaplan-Meier survival analysis using revision of the acetabular component for any reason (including isolated inlay revisions) as endpoint estimated the 11-year survival rate at 98% (95% CI: 92–99).

Interpretation — Uncemented acetabular fixation using the Allofit press-fit cup without additional screws was excellent into early in the second decade in this young and active patient cohort. The rate of complications related to the liner and to osteolysis was low.     

Design-related risk factors for revision of primary cemented stems: Analysis of 3 common stems in the Swedish Hip Arthroplasty Register

Background and purpose

Even small design variables of the femoral stem may influence the outcome of a hip arthroplasty. We investigated whether design-related factors play any role in the risk of non-aseptic revision of the 3 most frequently used primary cemented stem designs in the Swedish Hip Arthroplasty Register.

Patients and methods

We studied 71,184 primary cemented femoral stem implants (21,008 Exeter polished stems, 43,036 Lubinus SPII stems, and 7,140 Spectron EF Primary stems) that were inserted from 1999 through 2006. Design-specific characteristics were analyzed using separate Cox regression models that were adjusted for sex, age, diagnosis, incision, and number of operations (first vs. second).

Results

The crude revision rate varied between 0.8% (Lubinus SPII) and 1.4% (Spectron Primary). For the Exeter stem, the smallest femoral head diameter (22 mm) was associated with a higher risk of revision. No other design-specific parameters influenced the risk of revision of the Exeter stem. The smallest Lubinus stem size, a stem with extended neck length combined with a femoral head with increasing neck length, or the use of a cobalt-chromium head had a negative influence on the outcome. For the Spectron stem, the risk of revision was elevated for the smallest stem and for increasing offset calculated as the combined effect of high offset design and increasing neck length.

Interpretation

Overall revision rates were low, but for two of the stems studied design factors such as size and neck length or offset influenced the risk of non-aseptic revision.     

Implant Survival of Constrained Acetabular Device in Primary Total Hip Arthroplasty Based on Data From the Finnish Arthroplasty Register

BackgroundConstrained acetabular devices were developed to prevent dislocations after total hip arthroplasty (THA). However, the data on their success have been contradictory. In this study, we aimed to assess implant survival of the constrained acetabular device in primary THA based on the Finnish Arthroplasty Register data.MethodsA total of 373 primary THAs with constrained acetabular devices inserted from 2006 to 2017 were included. A reference group was formed on a 1:3 basis and matched for age, sex, and diagnosis, consisting of 1118 conventional THAs. Implant survival estimates using death as a competing risk were assessed with revision for any reason and for any aseptic reason as the endpoints. The Cox multiple regression models were adjusted for age, sex, and diagnosis. The mean follow-up time was 3.3 (0-12.4) years for the constrained device group and 3.8 (0-12.0) years for the reference group.ResultsOverall, there were 21 revisions in the constrained device group and 49 in the reference group. The 8-year survivorship for any reason was 94% (confidence interval [CI]: 91-96) for the constrained device group and 93% (CI: 89-97) for the reference group. With revision for any aseptic reason as the endpoint, the 8-year survivorships were 97% (CI: 95-99) and 94% (CI: 90-98), respectively. During the first 1.5 years, the constrained acetabular device group had a similar revision risk (hazard ratio: 1.09 [CI: 0.57-2.07], P = .8) to that of the reference group.ConclusionThe constrained acetabular device had good survival in primary THA, and our results support its continued use even in high-risk patients.