Limits...
Risk of complication and revision total hip arthroplasty among Medicare patients with different bearing surfaces.

Bozic KJ, Ong K, Lau E, Kurtz SM, Vail TP, Rubash HE, Berry DJ - Clin. Orthop. Relat. Res. (2010)

Bottom Line: These bearing surfaces are associated with unique risks and benefits and higher costs.After adjusting for patient and hospital factors, M-M bearings were associated with a higher risk of periprosthetic joint infection (hazard ratio, 3.03; confidence interval, 1.02-9.09) when compared with C-C bearings (0.59% versus 0.32%, respectively).Hard-on-hard THA bearings are of questionable value in Medicare patients, given the higher cost associated with their use and uncertain long-term benefits in older patients.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, University of California, San Francisco, CA 94143-0728, USA. kevin.bozic@ucsf.edu

ABSTRACT

Background: To address the long-term problems of bearing surface wear and osteolysis associated with conventional metal-polyethylene (M-PE) total hip arthroplasty (THA), metal-metal (M-M), and ceramic-ceramic (C-C) bearings have been introduced. These bearing surfaces are associated with unique risks and benefits and higher costs. However the relative risks of these three bearings in an older population is unknown.

Questions/purposes: We compared the short-term risk of complication and revision THA among Medicare patients having a primary THA with metal-polyethylene (M-PE), metal-metal (M-M), and ceramic-ceramic (C-C) bearings.

Methods: We used the 2005 to 2007 100% Medicare inpatient claim files to perform a matched cohort analysis in three separate cohorts of THA patients (M-PE, M-M, and C-C) who were matched by age, gender, and US census region. Multivariate Cox proportional-hazards models were constructed to compare complication and revision THA risk among cohorts, adjusting for medical comorbidities, race, socioeconomic status, and hospital factors.

Results: After adjusting for patient and hospital factors, M-M bearings were associated with a higher risk of periprosthetic joint infection (hazard ratio, 3.03; confidence interval, 1.02-9.09) when compared with C-C bearings (0.59% versus 0.32%, respectively). There were no other differences among bearing cohorts in the adjusted risk of revision THA or any other complication.

Conclusions: The risk of short-term complication (including dislocation) and revision THA were similar among appropriately matched Medicare THA patients regardless of bearing surface. Hard-on-hard THA bearings are of questionable value in Medicare patients, given the higher cost associated with their use and uncertain long-term benefits in older patients.

Level of evidence: Level II, prognostic study. See Guidelines for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Show MeSH

Related in: MedlinePlus

This graph shows trends of higher overall rates of DVT for M-M versus C-C bearings (unadjusted). (T) = percentage of patients without the complication (DVT) at the given time points.
© Copyright Policy
Related In: Results  -  Collection


getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC2914292&req=5

Fig4: This graph shows trends of higher overall rates of DVT for M-M versus C-C bearings (unadjusted). (T) = percentage of patients without the complication (DVT) at the given time points.

Mentions: When comparing the unadjusted risk of complication using the Kaplan-Meier method, M-M bearings showed an apparent trend toward higher overall risk of DVT (Fig. 4) and revision THA (Fig. 5) than C-C bearings. However, these differences were not present after adjusting for other covariates in these matched cohorts (Table 1). After controlling for patient and hospital factors, M-M bearings were associated with a higher risk of periprosthetic joint infection (hazard ratio, 3.03; confidence interval, 1.02–9.09) when compared with C-C bearings. There were no other differences among cohorts in the adjusted risk of revision THA or any other complication, including DVT, dislocation, or mechanical loosening (Table 1).Fig. 4


Risk of complication and revision total hip arthroplasty among Medicare patients with different bearing surfaces.

Bozic KJ, Ong K, Lau E, Kurtz SM, Vail TP, Rubash HE, Berry DJ - Clin. Orthop. Relat. Res. (2010)

This graph shows trends of higher overall rates of DVT for M-M versus C-C bearings (unadjusted). (T) = percentage of patients without the complication (DVT) at the given time points.
© Copyright Policy
Related In: Results  -  Collection

Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC2914292&req=5

Fig4: This graph shows trends of higher overall rates of DVT for M-M versus C-C bearings (unadjusted). (T) = percentage of patients without the complication (DVT) at the given time points.
Mentions: When comparing the unadjusted risk of complication using the Kaplan-Meier method, M-M bearings showed an apparent trend toward higher overall risk of DVT (Fig. 4) and revision THA (Fig. 5) than C-C bearings. However, these differences were not present after adjusting for other covariates in these matched cohorts (Table 1). After controlling for patient and hospital factors, M-M bearings were associated with a higher risk of periprosthetic joint infection (hazard ratio, 3.03; confidence interval, 1.02–9.09) when compared with C-C bearings. There were no other differences among cohorts in the adjusted risk of revision THA or any other complication, including DVT, dislocation, or mechanical loosening (Table 1).Fig. 4

Bottom Line: These bearing surfaces are associated with unique risks and benefits and higher costs.After adjusting for patient and hospital factors, M-M bearings were associated with a higher risk of periprosthetic joint infection (hazard ratio, 3.03; confidence interval, 1.02-9.09) when compared with C-C bearings (0.59% versus 0.32%, respectively).Hard-on-hard THA bearings are of questionable value in Medicare patients, given the higher cost associated with their use and uncertain long-term benefits in older patients.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, University of California, San Francisco, CA 94143-0728, USA. kevin.bozic@ucsf.edu

ABSTRACT

Background: To address the long-term problems of bearing surface wear and osteolysis associated with conventional metal-polyethylene (M-PE) total hip arthroplasty (THA), metal-metal (M-M), and ceramic-ceramic (C-C) bearings have been introduced. These bearing surfaces are associated with unique risks and benefits and higher costs. However the relative risks of these three bearings in an older population is unknown.

Questions/purposes: We compared the short-term risk of complication and revision THA among Medicare patients having a primary THA with metal-polyethylene (M-PE), metal-metal (M-M), and ceramic-ceramic (C-C) bearings.

Methods: We used the 2005 to 2007 100% Medicare inpatient claim files to perform a matched cohort analysis in three separate cohorts of THA patients (M-PE, M-M, and C-C) who were matched by age, gender, and US census region. Multivariate Cox proportional-hazards models were constructed to compare complication and revision THA risk among cohorts, adjusting for medical comorbidities, race, socioeconomic status, and hospital factors.

Results: After adjusting for patient and hospital factors, M-M bearings were associated with a higher risk of periprosthetic joint infection (hazard ratio, 3.03; confidence interval, 1.02-9.09) when compared with C-C bearings (0.59% versus 0.32%, respectively). There were no other differences among bearing cohorts in the adjusted risk of revision THA or any other complication.

Conclusions: The risk of short-term complication (including dislocation) and revision THA were similar among appropriately matched Medicare THA patients regardless of bearing surface. Hard-on-hard THA bearings are of questionable value in Medicare patients, given the higher cost associated with their use and uncertain long-term benefits in older patients.

Level of evidence: Level II, prognostic study. See Guidelines for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Show MeSH
Related in: MedlinePlus