Abstract

AimsTo determine the outcomes following revision surgery of metal-on-metal hip arthroplasties (MoMHA) performed for adverse reactions to metal debris (ARMD), and to identify factors predictive of re-revision.Patients and MethodsWe performed a retrospective observational study using National Joint Registry (NJR) data on 2535 MoMHAs undergoing revision surgery for ARMD between 2008 and 2014. The outcomes studied following revision were intra-operative complications, mortality and re-revision surgery. Predictors of re-revision were identified using competing-risk regression modelling.ResultsIntra-operative complications occurred in 40 revisions (1.6%). The cumulative five-year patient survival rate was 95.9% (95% confidence intervals (CI) 92.3 to 97.8). Re-revision surgery was performed in 192 hips (7.6%). The cumulative five-year implant survival rate was 89.5% (95% CI 87.3 to 91.3). Predictors of re-revision were high body mass index at revision (subhazard ratio (SHR) 1.06 per kg/m2 increase, 95% CI 1.02 to 1.09), modular component only revisions (head and liner with or without taper adapter; SHR 2.01, 95% CI 1.19 to 3.38), ceramic-on-ceramic revision bearings (SHR 1.86, 95% CI 1.23 to 2.80), and acetabular bone grafting (SHR 2.10, 95% CI 1.43 to 3.07). These four factors remained predictive of re-revision when the missing data were imputed.ConclusionThe short-term risk of re-revision following MoMHA revision surgery performed for ARMD was comparable with that reported in the NJR following all-cause non-MoMHA revision surgery. However, the factors predictive of re-revision included those which could be modified by the surgeon, suggesting that rates of failure following ARMD revision may be reduced further.Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2017;99-B:1020–7.

Highlights

  • The short-term risk of re-revision following metal-on-metal hip arthroplasties (MoMHA) revision surgery performed for adverse reactions to metal debris (ARMD) was comparable with that reported in the National Joint Registry (NJR) following all-cause non-MoMHA revision surgery

  • The factors predictive of re-revision included those which could be modified by the surgeon, suggesting that rates of failure following ARMD revision may be reduced further

  • Implant survival and patient-reported outcomes have been inferior for MoMHAs revised for ARMD compared with other indications, and compared with matched patients undergoing primary total hip arthroplasty (THA).[1]

Read more

Summary

Methods

We performed a retrospective observational study using National Joint Registry (NJR) data on 2535 MoMHAs undergoing revision surgery for ARMD between 2008 and 2014. A retrospective observational study was performed using all data submitted to the NJR up to 14 August 2015. This dataset included details of all primary MoMHAs (THA and hip resurfacing, HR) which subsequently underwent revision surgery for adverse soft-tissue reaction to particulate debris as recorded in the NJR between 01 June 2008 and 14 August 2014 (n = 2567). Prior to obtaining the dataset the entire NJR database was linked with the Office for National Statistics database, which provides data on allcause patient mortality, using unique patient identifiers

Results
Discussion
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call