Loading…

Different competing risks models for different questions may give similar results in arthroplasty registers in the presence of few events

Background and purpose - In arthroplasty registry studies, the analysis of time to revision is complicated by the competing risk of death. There are no clear guidelines for the choice between the 2 main adjusted analysis methods, cause-specific Cox and Fine-Gray regression, for orthopedic data. We i...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Acta orthopaedica 2018-04, Vol.89 (2), p.145-151
Main Authors: Van Der Pas, Stéphanie, Nelissen, Rob, Fiocco, Marta
Format: Article
Language:English
Citations: Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
cited_by cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c1554-64ff39b61ff758cd4cee6fe59529a13afc6de22ce96811422ea357318cafa8ec3
cites
container_end_page 151
container_issue 2
container_start_page 145
container_title Acta orthopaedica
container_volume 89
creator Van Der Pas, Stéphanie
Nelissen, Rob
Fiocco, Marta
description Background and purpose - In arthroplasty registry studies, the analysis of time to revision is complicated by the competing risk of death. There are no clear guidelines for the choice between the 2 main adjusted analysis methods, cause-specific Cox and Fine-Gray regression, for orthopedic data. We investigated whether there are benefits, such as insight into different aspects of progression to revision, to using either 1 or both regression methods in arthroplasty registry studies in general, and specifically when the length of follow-up is short relative to the expected survival of the implants. Patients and methods - Cause-specific Cox regression and Fine-Gray regression were performed on total hip (138,234 hips, 124,560 patients) and knee (139,070 knees, 125,213 patients) replacement data from the Dutch Arthroplasty Register (median follow-up 3.1 years, maximum 8 years), with sex, age, ASA score, diagnosis, and type of fixation as explanatory variables. The similarity of the resulting hazard ratios and confidence intervals was assessed visually and by computing the relative differences of the resulting subdistribution and cause-specific hazard ratios. Results - The outcomes of the cause-specific Cox and Fine-Gray regressions were numerically very close. The largest relative difference between the hazard ratios was 3.5%. Interpretation - The most likely explanation for the similarity is that there are relatively few events (revisions and deaths), due to the short follow-up compared with the expected failure-free survival of the hip and knee prostheses. Despite the similarity, we recommend always performing both cause-specific Cox and Fine-Gray regression. In this way, both etiology and prediction can be investigated.
doi_str_mv 10.1080/17453674.2018.1427314
format article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_pubme</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1993388887</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>1993388887</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c1554-64ff39b61ff758cd4cee6fe59529a13afc6de22ce96811422ea357318cafa8ec3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNo9kMtKAzEUhoMgtlYfQcnSzdTJbSZZSr1CwY2uhzRz0kbnZpKp9BF8a2Otrg78_8cP50PoguRzksv8mpRcsKLkc5oTOSeclozwIzT9yTNWSDpBpyG85TmTXOUnaEIVk5ILOkVft85a8NBFbPp2gOi6NfYuvAfc9jU0Adve4_of-hghRNd3qdY7vHZbwMG1rtEeewhjEwN2HdY-bnw_NDrEXcrXLkTw-yZuAA-JhM4A7i228Ilhm5bDGTq2uglwfrgz9Hp_97J4zJbPD0-Lm2VmiBA8K7i1TK0KYm0ppKm5ASgsCCWo0oRpa4oaKDWgCkmSCgqaieRDGm21BMNm6Op3d_D9_puqdcFA0-gO-jFURCmW7EhZJvTygI6rFupq8K7Vflf96WPfFtB09w</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1993388887</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Different competing risks models for different questions may give similar results in arthroplasty registers in the presence of few events</title><source>EBSCOhost SPORTDiscus with Full Text</source><source>Open Access: PubMed Central</source><source>Taylor &amp; Francis Open Access</source><creator>Van Der Pas, Stéphanie ; Nelissen, Rob ; Fiocco, Marta</creator><creatorcontrib>Van Der Pas, Stéphanie ; Nelissen, Rob ; Fiocco, Marta</creatorcontrib><description>Background and purpose - In arthroplasty registry studies, the analysis of time to revision is complicated by the competing risk of death. There are no clear guidelines for the choice between the 2 main adjusted analysis methods, cause-specific Cox and Fine-Gray regression, for orthopedic data. We investigated whether there are benefits, such as insight into different aspects of progression to revision, to using either 1 or both regression methods in arthroplasty registry studies in general, and specifically when the length of follow-up is short relative to the expected survival of the implants. Patients and methods - Cause-specific Cox regression and Fine-Gray regression were performed on total hip (138,234 hips, 124,560 patients) and knee (139,070 knees, 125,213 patients) replacement data from the Dutch Arthroplasty Register (median follow-up 3.1 years, maximum 8 years), with sex, age, ASA score, diagnosis, and type of fixation as explanatory variables. The similarity of the resulting hazard ratios and confidence intervals was assessed visually and by computing the relative differences of the resulting subdistribution and cause-specific hazard ratios. Results - The outcomes of the cause-specific Cox and Fine-Gray regressions were numerically very close. The largest relative difference between the hazard ratios was 3.5%. Interpretation - The most likely explanation for the similarity is that there are relatively few events (revisions and deaths), due to the short follow-up compared with the expected failure-free survival of the hip and knee prostheses. Despite the similarity, we recommend always performing both cause-specific Cox and Fine-Gray regression. In this way, both etiology and prediction can be investigated.</description><identifier>EISSN: 1745-3682</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1080/17453674.2018.1427314</identifier><identifier>PMID: 29388452</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>England</publisher><ispartof>Acta orthopaedica, 2018-04, Vol.89 (2), p.145-151</ispartof><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c1554-64ff39b61ff758cd4cee6fe59529a13afc6de22ce96811422ea357318cafa8ec3</citedby></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,27924,27925</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29388452$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Van Der Pas, Stéphanie</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Nelissen, Rob</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Fiocco, Marta</creatorcontrib><title>Different competing risks models for different questions may give similar results in arthroplasty registers in the presence of few events</title><title>Acta orthopaedica</title><addtitle>Acta Orthop</addtitle><description>Background and purpose - In arthroplasty registry studies, the analysis of time to revision is complicated by the competing risk of death. There are no clear guidelines for the choice between the 2 main adjusted analysis methods, cause-specific Cox and Fine-Gray regression, for orthopedic data. We investigated whether there are benefits, such as insight into different aspects of progression to revision, to using either 1 or both regression methods in arthroplasty registry studies in general, and specifically when the length of follow-up is short relative to the expected survival of the implants. Patients and methods - Cause-specific Cox regression and Fine-Gray regression were performed on total hip (138,234 hips, 124,560 patients) and knee (139,070 knees, 125,213 patients) replacement data from the Dutch Arthroplasty Register (median follow-up 3.1 years, maximum 8 years), with sex, age, ASA score, diagnosis, and type of fixation as explanatory variables. The similarity of the resulting hazard ratios and confidence intervals was assessed visually and by computing the relative differences of the resulting subdistribution and cause-specific hazard ratios. Results - The outcomes of the cause-specific Cox and Fine-Gray regressions were numerically very close. The largest relative difference between the hazard ratios was 3.5%. Interpretation - The most likely explanation for the similarity is that there are relatively few events (revisions and deaths), due to the short follow-up compared with the expected failure-free survival of the hip and knee prostheses. Despite the similarity, we recommend always performing both cause-specific Cox and Fine-Gray regression. In this way, both etiology and prediction can be investigated.</description><issn>1745-3682</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2018</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNo9kMtKAzEUhoMgtlYfQcnSzdTJbSZZSr1CwY2uhzRz0kbnZpKp9BF8a2Otrg78_8cP50PoguRzksv8mpRcsKLkc5oTOSeclozwIzT9yTNWSDpBpyG85TmTXOUnaEIVk5ILOkVft85a8NBFbPp2gOi6NfYuvAfc9jU0Adve4_of-hghRNd3qdY7vHZbwMG1rtEeewhjEwN2HdY-bnw_NDrEXcrXLkTw-yZuAA-JhM4A7i228Ilhm5bDGTq2uglwfrgz9Hp_97J4zJbPD0-Lm2VmiBA8K7i1TK0KYm0ppKm5ASgsCCWo0oRpa4oaKDWgCkmSCgqaieRDGm21BMNm6Op3d_D9_puqdcFA0-gO-jFURCmW7EhZJvTygI6rFupq8K7Vflf96WPfFtB09w</recordid><startdate>201804</startdate><enddate>201804</enddate><creator>Van Der Pas, Stéphanie</creator><creator>Nelissen, Rob</creator><creator>Fiocco, Marta</creator><scope>NPM</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>201804</creationdate><title>Different competing risks models for different questions may give similar results in arthroplasty registers in the presence of few events</title><author>Van Der Pas, Stéphanie ; Nelissen, Rob ; Fiocco, Marta</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c1554-64ff39b61ff758cd4cee6fe59529a13afc6de22ce96811422ea357318cafa8ec3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2018</creationdate><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Van Der Pas, Stéphanie</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Nelissen, Rob</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Fiocco, Marta</creatorcontrib><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Acta orthopaedica</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Van Der Pas, Stéphanie</au><au>Nelissen, Rob</au><au>Fiocco, Marta</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Different competing risks models for different questions may give similar results in arthroplasty registers in the presence of few events</atitle><jtitle>Acta orthopaedica</jtitle><addtitle>Acta Orthop</addtitle><date>2018-04</date><risdate>2018</risdate><volume>89</volume><issue>2</issue><spage>145</spage><epage>151</epage><pages>145-151</pages><eissn>1745-3682</eissn><abstract>Background and purpose - In arthroplasty registry studies, the analysis of time to revision is complicated by the competing risk of death. There are no clear guidelines for the choice between the 2 main adjusted analysis methods, cause-specific Cox and Fine-Gray regression, for orthopedic data. We investigated whether there are benefits, such as insight into different aspects of progression to revision, to using either 1 or both regression methods in arthroplasty registry studies in general, and specifically when the length of follow-up is short relative to the expected survival of the implants. Patients and methods - Cause-specific Cox regression and Fine-Gray regression were performed on total hip (138,234 hips, 124,560 patients) and knee (139,070 knees, 125,213 patients) replacement data from the Dutch Arthroplasty Register (median follow-up 3.1 years, maximum 8 years), with sex, age, ASA score, diagnosis, and type of fixation as explanatory variables. The similarity of the resulting hazard ratios and confidence intervals was assessed visually and by computing the relative differences of the resulting subdistribution and cause-specific hazard ratios. Results - The outcomes of the cause-specific Cox and Fine-Gray regressions were numerically very close. The largest relative difference between the hazard ratios was 3.5%. Interpretation - The most likely explanation for the similarity is that there are relatively few events (revisions and deaths), due to the short follow-up compared with the expected failure-free survival of the hip and knee prostheses. Despite the similarity, we recommend always performing both cause-specific Cox and Fine-Gray regression. In this way, both etiology and prediction can be investigated.</abstract><cop>England</cop><pmid>29388452</pmid><doi>10.1080/17453674.2018.1427314</doi><tpages>7</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier EISSN: 1745-3682
ispartof Acta orthopaedica, 2018-04, Vol.89 (2), p.145-151
issn 1745-3682
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1993388887
source EBSCOhost SPORTDiscus with Full Text; Open Access: PubMed Central; Taylor & Francis Open Access
title Different competing risks models for different questions may give similar results in arthroplasty registers in the presence of few events
url http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-27T12%3A07%3A28IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_pubme&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Different%20competing%20risks%20models%20for%20different%20questions%20may%20give%20similar%20results%20in%20arthroplasty%20registers%20in%20the%20presence%20of%20few%20events&rft.jtitle=Acta%20orthopaedica&rft.au=Van%20Der%20Pas,%20St%C3%A9phanie&rft.date=2018-04&rft.volume=89&rft.issue=2&rft.spage=145&rft.epage=151&rft.pages=145-151&rft.eissn=1745-3682&rft_id=info:doi/10.1080/17453674.2018.1427314&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_pubme%3E1993388887%3C/proquest_pubme%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c1554-64ff39b61ff758cd4cee6fe59529a13afc6de22ce96811422ea357318cafa8ec3%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1993388887&rft_id=info:pmid/29388452&rfr_iscdi=true