Revision Total Hip Arthoplasty: Factors Associated with Re-Revision Surgery

被引:72
作者
Khatod, Monti [1 ]
Cafri, Guy [1 ]
Inacio, Maria C. S. [1 ]
Schepps, Alan L. [1 ]
Paxton, Elizabeth W. [1 ]
Bini, Stefano A. [1 ]
机构
[1] Kaiser Permanente, Surg Outcomes & Anal, San Diego, CA USA
关键词
STATES MEDICARE POPULATION; MODULAR FEMORAL IMPLANT; ARTHROPLASTY REGISTER; UNITED-STATES; TOTAL JOINT; FOLLOW-UP; RISK-FACTORS; MISSING DATA; COX MODEL; BONE LOSS;
D O I
10.2106/JBJS.N.00073
中图分类号
R826.8 [整形外科学]; R782.2 [口腔颌面部整形外科学]; R726.2 [小儿整形外科学]; R62 [整形外科学(修复外科学)];
学科分类号
摘要
Background: The survivorship of implants after revision total hip arthroplasty and risk factors associated with re-revision are not well defined. We evaluated the re-revision rate with use of the institutional total joint replacement registry. The purpose of this study was to determine patient, implant, and surgeon factors associated with re-revision total hip arthroplasty. Methods: A retrospective cohort study was conducted. The total joint replacement registry was used to identify patients who had undergone revision total hip arthroplasty for aseptic reasons from April 1, 2001, to December 31, 2010. The end point of interest was re-revision total hip arthroplasty. Risk factors evaluated for re-revision total hip arthroplasty included: patient risk factors (age, sex, body mass index, race, and general health status), implant risk factors (fixation type, bearing surface, femoral head size, and component replacement), and surgeon risk factors (volume and experience). A multi-variable Cox proportional hazards model was used. Results: Six hundred and twenty-nine revision total hip arthroplasties with sixty-three (10%) re-revisions were evaluated. The mean cohort age (and standard deviation) was 57.0 +/- 12.4 years, the mean body mass index (and standard deviation) was 29.5 +/- 6.1 kg/m(2), and most of the patients were women (64.5%) and white (81.9%) and had an American Society of Anesthesiologists score of <3 (52.9%). The five-year implant survival after revision total hip arthroplasty was 86.8% (95% confidence interval, 83.57% to 90.25%). In adjusted models, age, total number of revision surgical procedures performed by the surgeon, fixation, and bearing surface were associated with the risk of re-revision. For every ten-year increase in patient age, the hazard ratio for re-revision decreases by a factor of 0.72 (95% confidence interval, 0.58 to 0.90). For every five revision surgical procedures performed by a surgeon, the risk of revision decreases by a factor of 0.93 (95% confidence interval, 0.86 to 0.99). At the time of revision, a new or retained cemented femoral implant or all-cemented hip implant increases the risk of revision by a factor of 3.19 (95% confidence interval, 1.22 to 8.38) relative to a retained or new uncemented hip implant. A ceramic on a highly cross-linked polyethylene bearing articulation decreases the hazard relative to metal on highly cross-linked polyethylene by a factor of 0.32 (95% confidence interval, 0.11 to 0.95). Metal on constrained bearing increases the hazard relative to metal on highly cross-linked polyethylene by a factor of 3.32 (95% confidence interval, 1.16 to 9.48). Conclusions: When evaluating patient, implant, and surgical factors at the time of revision total hip arthroplasty, age, surgeon experience, implant fixation, and bearing surfaces had significant impacts on the risk of re-revision.
引用
收藏
页码:359 / 366
页数:8
相关论文
共 49 条
[1]  
Australian Orthopedic Association, 2011, HIP KNEE ARTHR
[2]   Third-Generation Ceramic-on-Ceramic Bearing Surfaces in Revision Total Hip Arthroplasty [J].
Chang, Jun-Dong ;
Kamdar, Rutuj ;
Yoo, Je-Hyun ;
Hur, Mina ;
Lee, Sang-Soo .
JOURNAL OF ARTHROPLASTY, 2009, 24 (08) :1231-1235
[3]   A comparison of inclusive and restrictive strategies in modern missing data procedures [J].
Collins, LM ;
Schafer, JL ;
Kam, CM .
PSYCHOLOGICAL METHODS, 2001, 6 (04) :330-351
[4]   Revision Total Hip Arthroplasty Using a Modular Femoral Implant in Paprosky Type III and IV Femoral Bone Loss [J].
Desai, Rasesh R. ;
Malkani, Arthur L. ;
Hitt, Kirby D. ;
Jaffe, Fredrick F. ;
Schurman, John R., II ;
Shen, Jianhua .
JOURNAL OF ARTHROPLASTY, 2012, 27 (08) :1492-1498
[5]   ADAPTING A CLINICAL COMORBIDITY INDEX FOR USE WITH ICD-9-CM ADMINISTRATIVE DATABASES [J].
DEYO, RA ;
CHERKIN, DC ;
CIOL, MA .
JOURNAL OF CLINICAL EPIDEMIOLOGY, 1992, 45 (06) :613-619
[6]  
Engh CA, 2004, CLIN ORTHOP RELAT R, P135
[7]   Revision of Failed Total Hip Arthroplasty Acetabular Cups to Porous Tantalum Components A 5-Year Follow-Up Study [J].
Fernandez-Fairen, Mariano ;
Murcia, Antonio ;
Blanco, Agustin ;
Merono, Antonio ;
Murcia, Antonio, Jr. ;
Ballester, Jorge .
JOURNAL OF ARTHROPLASTY, 2010, 25 (06) :865-872
[8]   The risk of revision due to dislocation after total hip arthroplasty depends on surgical approach, femoral head size, sex, and primary diagnosis An analysis of 78,098 operations in the Swedish Hip Arthroplasty Register [J].
Hailer, Nils P. ;
Weiss, Rudiger J. ;
Stark, Andre ;
Karrholm, Johan .
ACTA ORTHOPAEDICA, 2012, 83 (05) :442-448
[9]  
Hartman CW, 2011, J BONE JOINT SURG AM, V93A, P2311, DOI 10.2106/JBJS.9324icl
[10]   Decreased Dislocation After Revision Total Hip Arthroplasty Using Larger Femoral Head Size and Posterior Capsular Repair [J].
Hummel, Matthew T. ;
Malkani, Arthur L. ;
Yakkanti, Madhusudhan R. ;
Baker, Dale L. .
JOURNAL OF ARTHROPLASTY, 2009, 24 (06) :73-76