Higher risk of 2-year cup revision of ceramic-on-ceramic versus ceramic-on-polyethylene bearing: analysis of 33,454 primary press-fit total hip arthroplasties registered in the Dutch Arthroplasty Register (LROI)

Background and purpose: The influence of bearing on short-term revision in press-fit total hip arthroplasty (THA) remains under-reported. The aim of this study was to describe 2-year cup revision rates of ceramic-on-ceramic (CoC) and ceramic-on-polyethylene (CoPE). Patients and methods: Primary press-fit THAs with one of the three most used cups available with both CoC or CoPE bearing recorded in the Dutch Arthroplasty Register (LROI) were included (2007–2019). Primary outcome was 2-year cup revision for all reasons. Secondary outcomes were: reasons for revision, incidence of different revision procedures and use of both bearings over time. Results: 2-year Kaplan-Meier cup revision rate in 33,454 THAs (12,535 CoC; 20,919 CoPE) showed a higher rate in CoC (0.67% [95% CI, 0.54–0.81]) compared to CoPE (0.44% [95% CI, 0.34–0.54]) ( p = 0.004). Correction for confounders (age, gender, cup type, head size) resulted in a hazard ratio (HR) of 0.64 [95%CI, 0.48–0.87] ( p = 0.019). Reasons for cup revision differed only by more cup revision due to loosening in CoC (26.2% vs.1 3.2%) ( p = 0.030). For aseptic loosening a revision rate of 0.153% [95% CI, 0.075–0.231] was seen in CoC and 0.058% [95%CI 0.019–0.097] in CoPE ( p = 0.007). Correction for head size resulted in a HR of 0.475 [95% CI, 0.197–1.141] ( p = 0.096). Incidence of different revision procedures did not differ between bearings. Over time the use of CoPE has increased and CoC decreased. Conclusions: A higher 2-year cup revision rate in press-fit THA was observed in CoC compared to CoPE. Cup loosening was the only significantly different reason for revision and seen more often in CoC and mostly aseptic. Future randomised controlled trials need to confirm causality, since the early cup revision data provided has the potential to be useful when choosing the bearing in press-fit THA, when combined with other factors like bone quality and patient and implant characteristics.

Comparable mortality but higher revision rate after uncemented compared with cemented total hip arthroplasties in patients 80 years and older: report of 43,053 cases of the Dutch Arthroplasty Register

Background and purpose — Mortality and revision risks are important issues during shared decision-making for total hip arthroplasty (THA) especially in elderly patients. We examined mortality and revision rates as well as associated patient and prosthesis factors in primary THA for osteoarthritis (OA) in patients ≥ 80 years in the Netherlands. Patients and methods — We included all primary THAs for OA in patients ≥ 80 years in the period 2007–2019. Patient mortality and prosthesis revision rates were calculated using Kaplan-Meier survival analyses. Risk factors for patient mortality and prosthesis revision were analyzed using multivariable Cox regression analysis adjusted for age, sex, ASA class, fixation method, head size, and approach.Results — Mortality was 0.2% at 7 days, 0.4% at 30 days, 2.7% at 1 year, and 20% at 5 years. Mortality was higher in males and higher ASA class, but did not differ between fixation methods. The 1-year revision rate was 1.6% (95% CI 1.5–1.7) and 2.6% (CI 2.5–2.7) after 5 years. Multivariable Cox regression analysis showed a higher risk of revision for uncemented (hazard ratio [HR] 1.6; CI 1.4–1.8) and reverse hybrid THAs (HR 2.9; CI 2.1–3.8) compared with cemented THAs. Periprosthetic fracture was the most frequently registeredreason for revision in uncemented THAs. Interpretation — Mortality is comparable but revision rate is higher after uncemented compared with cemented THA in patients 80 years and older, indicating that cemented THA might be a safer option in this patient group.

The Main Trends in Hip Arthroplasty Based on the Data in the Vreden’s Arthroplasty Register from 2007 to 2020

This publication is the official report describing all total hip arthroplasty procedures registered in the database from 01.01.2007 to 31.12.2020. During this period, 74762 operations were performed: 67019 (89.64%) primary and 7743 (10.36%) revision. The proportion of males and females underwent primary arthroplasty was 41.1% and 59.0%, respectively. The age of patients with primary arthroplasty was 57.8 years (95% CI from 57.7 to 57.9), with revision 59.3 years (95% CI from 59.0 to 59.6). The absolute number of primary hip arthroplasty procedures added into the database increased annually from 2007 to 2012. Since 2015, there has been a trend towards a decrease in the number of hip arthroplasty, due to the more intensive growth in the number of knee replacements performed. The number of revision hip arthroplasty operations varies from year to year with a clear tendency to increase, except 2020. The large proportion of revisions are accounted for by early revisions performed in the first years after primary hip arthroplasty, as well as early re-revisions. The main types of implants fixation on primary arthroplasty during the reporting period were cementless (50.89%) and hybrid (32.33%). In patients of older age groups, there is a significant decrease in the proportion of cementless fixation, while the proportion of hybrid, reverse hybrid and cemented structures is increasing. There are significant fluctuations in the ratio of different types of implants fixation in different years.

Concordance among Swedish, German, Danish, and UK EQ-5D-3L Value Sets: Analyses of Patient-Reported Outcomes in the Swedish Hip Arthroplasty Register

Background: Application of different value sets to health-related quality of life (HRQoL) measured with the EQ-5D-3L may lead to different results due to differences in methods, perspectives, and countries used. Focusing on concordance, this study aimed at understanding the implications of applying EQ-5D-3L value sets from Sweden, Germany, Denmark, and the UK to evaluate HRQoL of patients undergoing total hip replacement (THR) in Sweden before and after surgery. Methods: We performed a longitudinal study of patients in the Swedish Hip Arthroplasty Register from preoperative stage to 1-year follow-up (n = 73,523) using data collected from 2008 to 2016. Eight EQ-5D-3L value sets from the four countries were compared based on a valuation method (visual analogue scale (VAS) or time trade-off (TTO)), perspective (experience-based or hypothetical), and country. Concordance among the value sets with patient-reported EQ VAS score was also assessed. Longitudinal changes in EQ-5D-3L index over the 1-year follow-up were compared across value sets by method, perspective, and country. Results: Value sets based on the same method and perspective showed higher concordance in EQ-5D-3L index at both measurement time points than other comparisons. In the comparisons by perspective, VAS value sets showed higher concordance than TTO value sets. The Swedish VAS and the Danish TTO value sets showed the highest levels of concordance with patient-reported EQ VAS scores. Generally, value sets based on the same method and perspective had the smallest mean differences between changes in EQ-5D-3L indices from preoperative to 1-year postoperative follow-up. Conclusion: Among THR patients value sets based on the same method and perspective, a direct transfer of results across countries could be meaningful. In cases of differences in methods and perspectives among value sets, transfer of value sets across settings would have to consider conversion through crosswalk.