Skip to main content

Research Repository

Advanced Search

The design of the acetabular component and size of the femoral head influence the risk of revision following 34 721 single-brand cemented hip replacements

Jameson, SS; Baker, PN; Mason, J; Gregg, PJ; Brewster, N; Deehan, DJ; Reed, MR

The design of the acetabular component and size of the femoral head influence the risk of revision following 34 721 single-brand cemented hip replacements Thumbnail


Authors

SS Jameson

PN Baker

J Mason

PJ Gregg

N Brewster

DJ Deehan

MR Reed



Abstract

Despite excellent results, the use of cemented total hip replacement (THR) is declining. This retrospective cohort study records survival time to revision following primary cemented THR using the most common combination of components that accounted for almost a quarter of all cemented THRs, exploring risk factors independently associated with failure. All patients with osteoarthritis who had an Exeter V40/Contemporary THR (Stryker) implanted before 31 December 2010 and recorded in the National Joint Registry for England and Wales were included in the analysis. Cox’s proportional hazard models were used to analyse the extent to which risk of revision was related to patient, surgeon and implant covariates, with a significance threshold of p < 0.01. A total of 34 721 THRs were included in the study. The overall seven-year rate of revision for any reason was 1.70% (99% confidence interval (CI) 1.28 to 2.12). In the final adjusted model the risk of revision was significantly higher in THRs with the Contemporary hooded component (hazard ratio (HR) 1.88, p < 0.001) than with the flanged version, and in smaller head sizes (< 28 mm) compared with 28 mm diameter heads (HR 1.50, p = 0.005). The seven-year revision rate was 1.16% (99% CI 0.69 to 1.63) with a 28 mm diameter head and flanged component. The overall risk of revision was independent of age, gender, American Society of Anesthesiologists grade, body mass index, surgeon volume, surgical approach, brand of cement/presence of antibiotic, femoral head material (stainless steel/alumina) and stem taper size/offset. However, the risk of revision for dislocation was significantly higher with a ‘plus’ offset head (HR 2.05, p = 0.003) and a hooded acetabular component (HR 2.34, p < 0.001). In summary, we found that there were significant differences in failure between different designs of acetabular component and sizes of femoral head after adjustment for a range of covariates.

Citation

Jameson, S., Baker, P., Mason, J., Gregg, P., Brewster, N., Deehan, D., & Reed, M. (2012). The design of the acetabular component and size of the femoral head influence the risk of revision following 34 721 single-brand cemented hip replacements. The Bone & Joint Journal, 94-B(12), 1611-1617. https://doi.org/10.1302/0301-620x.94b12.30040

Journal Article Type Article
Publication Date Dec 1, 2012
Deposit Date May 9, 2013
Publicly Available Date Aug 2, 2013
Journal Bone and Joint Journal
Print ISSN 2049-4394
Electronic ISSN 2049-4408
Publisher British Editorial Society of Bone and Joint Surgery
Peer Reviewed Peer Reviewed
Volume 94-B
Issue 12
Pages 1611-1617
DOI https://doi.org/10.1302/0301-620x.94b12.30040

Files




You might also like



Downloadable Citations