Risk Factors for Total Hip Arthroplasty Aseptic Revision

Abstract The purpose of this study was to evaluate patient, operative, implant, surgeon, and hospital factors associated with aseptic revision after primary THA in patients registered in a large US Total Joint Replacement Registry. A total of 35,960 THAs registered from 4/2001–12/2010 were evaluated...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:The Journal of arthroplasty 2014-07, Vol.29 (7), p.1412-1417
Main Authors: Khatod, Monti, MD, Cafri, Guy, PhD, Namba, Robert S., MD, Inacio, Maria C.S., PhD, Paxton, Elizabeth W., MA
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Adult
Aged
Arthroplasty, Replacement, Hip - adverse effects
Arthroplasty, Replacement, Hip - methods
aseptic revisions
Body Mass Index
Ceramics
Female
Humans
Male
Metals
Middle Aged
Orthopedics
Polyethylene - chemistry
Prosthesis Design
Prosthesis Failure
Registries
Reoperation - methods
Retrospective Studies
Risk Factors
Survival Rate
total hip arthroplasty
Total Joint Replacement Registry
Treatment Outcome
United States
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Abstract The purpose of this study was to evaluate patient, operative, implant, surgeon, and hospital factors associated with aseptic revision after primary THA in patients registered in a large US Total Joint Replacement Registry. A total of 35,960 THAs registered from 4/2001–12/2010 were evaluated. The 8-year survival rate was 96.7% (95% CI 96.4%–97.0%). Females had a higher risk of aseptic revision than males. Hispanic and Asian patients had a lower risk of revision than white patients. Ceramic-on-ceramic, ceramic-on-conventional polyethylene, and metal-on-conventional polyethylene bearing surfaces had a higher risk of revision than metal-on-highly cross-linked polyethylene. Body mass index, health status, diabetes, diagnosis, fixation, approach, bilateral procedures, head size, surgeon fellowship training, surgeon and hospital volume were not revision risk factors.
ISSN:0883-5403
1532-8406
DOI:10.1016/j.arth.2014.01.023