Causes of revision after total hip arthroplasty in an orthopedics and traumatology regional center.
arthroplasty
aseptic loosening
prosthesis failure
total hip replacement
Journal
Medicine and pharmacy reports
ISSN: 2668-0572
Titre abrégé: Med Pharm Rep
Pays: Romania
ID NLM: 101742144
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Apr 2022
Apr 2022
Historique:
received:
29
03
2021
revised:
14
06
2021
accepted:
11
07
2021
entrez:
20
6
2022
pubmed:
21
6
2022
medline:
21
6
2022
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Despite the great success of primary total hip arthroplasty (THA), the number of revisions has significantly increased over the past years. The objectives of the study were to investigate the main causes that lead to revision of THA, the time interval between primary THA and revision, and the results of the revision surgery. We also assessed whether there was any correlation between the patients' age, BMI, diagnosis for primary THA and the cause of failure. This paper retrospectively analyzed 189 patients with THA revision surgery performed over a six-year period, between 2015 and 2020. Patients' charts were reviewed to collect data on patient's demographics, patient's primary THA and revision procedures, and the time interval between primary THA and revision surgery. Patients were divided into 3 groups according to the time interval THA-revision: group I (<5 years), group II (5-10 years) and group III (>10 years). The patients' mean age (82 men/107 women) was 69.59±7.85 years (range 31-92 years). The most frequent revision cause was aseptic loosening (52%), followed by periprosthetic fractures (18%), infection (17%) and persistent hip instability (12%). Patients' age (r=0.43) and BMI (r=-0.4) had low correlation with the time interval between THA and revision. The main causes for revision THA within less than five years are infection and instability, while revision for aseptic loosening is performed especially after five years from the primary THA. Osteonecrosis, post-traumatic osteoarthritis and femoral neck fracture are correlated with a higher incidence of revision at less than five years from the primary THA.
Sections du résumé
Background and aim
UNASSIGNED
Despite the great success of primary total hip arthroplasty (THA), the number of revisions has significantly increased over the past years. The objectives of the study were to investigate the main causes that lead to revision of THA, the time interval between primary THA and revision, and the results of the revision surgery. We also assessed whether there was any correlation between the patients' age, BMI, diagnosis for primary THA and the cause of failure.
Methods
UNASSIGNED
This paper retrospectively analyzed 189 patients with THA revision surgery performed over a six-year period, between 2015 and 2020. Patients' charts were reviewed to collect data on patient's demographics, patient's primary THA and revision procedures, and the time interval between primary THA and revision surgery. Patients were divided into 3 groups according to the time interval THA-revision: group I (<5 years), group II (5-10 years) and group III (>10 years).
Results
UNASSIGNED
The patients' mean age (82 men/107 women) was 69.59±7.85 years (range 31-92 years). The most frequent revision cause was aseptic loosening (52%), followed by periprosthetic fractures (18%), infection (17%) and persistent hip instability (12%). Patients' age (r=0.43) and BMI (r=-0.4) had low correlation with the time interval between THA and revision.
Conclusions
UNASSIGNED
The main causes for revision THA within less than five years are infection and instability, while revision for aseptic loosening is performed especially after five years from the primary THA. Osteonecrosis, post-traumatic osteoarthritis and femoral neck fracture are correlated with a higher incidence of revision at less than five years from the primary THA.
Identifiants
pubmed: 35721045
doi: 10.15386/mpr-2136
pii: cm-95-179
pmc: PMC9176300
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
179-184Références
Hip Int. 2015 Jan-Feb;25(1):34-8
pubmed: 25655740
J Am Acad Orthop Surg. 2008 Oct;16(10):596-607
pubmed: 18832603
SICOT J. 2017;3:2
pubmed: 28074774
Indian J Orthop. 2017 Jul-Aug;51(4):405-413
pubmed: 28790469
Postgrad Med J. 2007 May;83(979):312-6
pubmed: 17488859
Hip Pelvis. 2018 Jun;30(2):78-85
pubmed: 29896456
Materials (Basel). 2017 Jul 13;10(7):
pubmed: 28773153
Int Orthop. 2011 Dec;35(12):1783-9
pubmed: 21404023
Int J Sports Phys Ther. 2014 Nov;9(6):839-50
pubmed: 25383251
J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1966 May;48(2):245-59
pubmed: 5937593
Hip Int. 2017 Mar 31;27(2):180-186
pubmed: 27886353
Bone Joint J. 2018 Nov;100-B(11):1463-1470
pubmed: 30418062
Int Orthop. 2008 Oct;32(5):597-604
pubmed: 17443324
Biomed Res Int. 2018 Sep 25;2018:8987104
pubmed: 30356391
Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2013 Dec;471(12):3863-9
pubmed: 23529633
Medicine (Baltimore). 2017 May;96(19):e6687
pubmed: 28489745
EFORT Open Rev. 2018 Sep 24;3(9):507-512
pubmed: 30305935
J Arthroplasty. 2017 Jun;32(6):1954-1958
pubmed: 28236550
Int Orthop. 2007 Aug;31(4):439-43
pubmed: 16960720