Limits...
Population-based rates of revision of primary total hip arthroplasty: a systematic review.

Corbett KL, Losina E, Nti AA, Prokopetz JJ, Katz JN - PLoS ONE (2010)

Bottom Line: Estimates ranged from 72% to 86% in patients less than 60 years old and from 90 to 96% in older patients.Data reported from national registries suggest revision risks of 5 to 20% ten years following primary THA.Revision risks are lower in older THA recipients.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Orthopedic and Arthritis Center for Outcomes Research, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts, United States of America.

ABSTRACT

Background: Most research on failure leading to revision total hip arthroplasty (THA) is reported from single centers. We searched PubMed between January 2000 and August 2010 to identify population- or community-based studies evaluating ten-year revision risks. We report ten-year revision risk using the Kaplan-Meier method, stratifying by age and fixation technique.

Results: Thirteen papers met the inclusion criteria. Cemented prostheses had Kaplan-Meier estimates of revision-free implant survival of ten years ranging from 88% to 95%; uncemented prostheses had Kaplan-Meier estimates from 80% to 85%. Estimates ranged from 72% to 86% in patients less than 60 years old and from 90 to 96% in older patients.

Conclusion: Data reported from national registries suggest revision risks of 5 to 20% ten years following primary THA. Revision risks are lower in older THA recipients. Uncemented implants may have higher ten-year rates of revision, regardless of age.

Show MeSH

Related in: MedlinePlus

Manuscript search and selection process.
© Copyright Policy
Related In: Results  -  Collection


getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC2958142&req=5

pone-0013520-g001: Manuscript search and selection process.

Mentions: The results of the search for papers on revision of primary THA in national samples are shown in Figure 1. Thirty-seven abstracts were identified. Of these, eighteen were excluded from further consideration because they failed to address hip prosthesis survival (1 abstract), did not rely on population- or community-based samples (8), focused on specific causes of revision (1) or because they provided incidence rates of the primary THA rather than revision rates (8). Nineteen abstracts were eligible for further analysis; these papers were retrieved and reviewed. Of these, six were excluded because the samples were not population- or community-based. Thirteen papers were used as a basis for the current review: six from the Finnish Arthroplasty Register [8], [15], [16], [17], [18], [19], three from the Swedish Total Hip Replacement Register [12], [13], [20], three from the Norwegian Arthroplasty Register [14], [21], [22], and one from the Trent Regional Arthroplasty Study (TRAS) in England [23] (see Table 1). The Swedish, Norwegian, Finnish, and Trent Registers are described in Appendix S1 (see supporting information).


Population-based rates of revision of primary total hip arthroplasty: a systematic review.

Corbett KL, Losina E, Nti AA, Prokopetz JJ, Katz JN - PLoS ONE (2010)

Manuscript search and selection process.
© Copyright Policy
Related In: Results  -  Collection

Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC2958142&req=5

pone-0013520-g001: Manuscript search and selection process.
Mentions: The results of the search for papers on revision of primary THA in national samples are shown in Figure 1. Thirty-seven abstracts were identified. Of these, eighteen were excluded from further consideration because they failed to address hip prosthesis survival (1 abstract), did not rely on population- or community-based samples (8), focused on specific causes of revision (1) or because they provided incidence rates of the primary THA rather than revision rates (8). Nineteen abstracts were eligible for further analysis; these papers were retrieved and reviewed. Of these, six were excluded because the samples were not population- or community-based. Thirteen papers were used as a basis for the current review: six from the Finnish Arthroplasty Register [8], [15], [16], [17], [18], [19], three from the Swedish Total Hip Replacement Register [12], [13], [20], three from the Norwegian Arthroplasty Register [14], [21], [22], and one from the Trent Regional Arthroplasty Study (TRAS) in England [23] (see Table 1). The Swedish, Norwegian, Finnish, and Trent Registers are described in Appendix S1 (see supporting information).

Bottom Line: Estimates ranged from 72% to 86% in patients less than 60 years old and from 90 to 96% in older patients.Data reported from national registries suggest revision risks of 5 to 20% ten years following primary THA.Revision risks are lower in older THA recipients.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Orthopedic and Arthritis Center for Outcomes Research, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts, United States of America.

ABSTRACT

Background: Most research on failure leading to revision total hip arthroplasty (THA) is reported from single centers. We searched PubMed between January 2000 and August 2010 to identify population- or community-based studies evaluating ten-year revision risks. We report ten-year revision risk using the Kaplan-Meier method, stratifying by age and fixation technique.

Results: Thirteen papers met the inclusion criteria. Cemented prostheses had Kaplan-Meier estimates of revision-free implant survival of ten years ranging from 88% to 95%; uncemented prostheses had Kaplan-Meier estimates from 80% to 85%. Estimates ranged from 72% to 86% in patients less than 60 years old and from 90 to 96% in older patients.

Conclusion: Data reported from national registries suggest revision risks of 5 to 20% ten years following primary THA. Revision risks are lower in older THA recipients. Uncemented implants may have higher ten-year rates of revision, regardless of age.

Show MeSH
Related in: MedlinePlus