Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Using an asymmetric crosslinked polyethylene liner in primary total hip arthroplasty is associated with a lower risk of revision surgery : an analysis of the National Joint Registry.
Davis, Edward T; Pagkalos, Joseph; Kopjar, Branko.
Affiliation
  • Davis ET; The Royal Orthopaedic Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, Birmingham, UK.
  • Pagkalos J; Institute of Inflammation and Ageing, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK.
  • Kopjar B; The Royal Orthopaedic Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, Birmingham, UK.
Bone Joint J ; 103-B(9): 1479-1487, 2021 Sep.
Article in En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34465151
ABSTRACT

AIMS:

The aim of our study was to investigate the effect of asymmetric crosslinked polyethylene liner use on the risk of revision of cementless and hybrid total hip arthroplasties (THAs).

METHODS:

We undertook a registry study combining the National Joint Registry dataset with polyethylene manufacturing characteristics as supplied by the manufacturers. The primary endpoint was revision for any reason. We performed further analyses on other reasons including instability, aseptic loosening, wear, and liner dissociation. The primary analytic approach was Cox proportional hazard regression.

RESULTS:

A total of 213,146 THAs were included in the analysis. Overall, 2,997 revisions were recorded, 1,569 in THAs with a flat liner and 1,428 in THAs using an asymmetric liner. Flat liner THAs had a higher risk of revision for any reason than asymmetric liner THAs when implanted through a Hardinge/anterolateral approach (hazard ratio (HR) 1.169, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.022 to 1.337) and through a posterior approach (HR 1.122, 95% CI 1.108 to 1.346). There was no increased risk of revision for aseptic loosening when asymmetric liners were used for any surgical approach. A separate analysis of the three most frequently used crosslinked polyethylene liners was in agreement with this finding. When analyzing THAs with flat liners only, THAs implanted through a Hardinge/anterolateral approach were associated with a reduced risk of revision for instability compared to posterior approach THAs (HR 0.561 (95% CI 0.446 to 0.706)). When analyzing THAs with an asymmetric liner, there was no significant difference in the risk of revision for instability between the two approaches (HR 0.838 (95% CI 0.633 to 1.110)).

CONCLUSION:

For THAs implanted through the posterior approach, the use of asymmetric liners reduces the risk of revision for instability and revision for any reason. In THAs implanted through a Hardinge/anterolateral approach, the use of an asymmetric liner was associated with a reduced risk of revision. The effect on revision for instability was less pronounced than in the posterior approach. Cite this article Bone Joint J 2021;103-B(9)1479-1487.
Subject(s)
Key words

Full text: 1 Collection: 01-internacional Database: MEDLINE Main subject: Prosthesis Design / Reoperation / Arthroplasty, Replacement, Hip / Polyethylene / Hip Prosthesis Type of study: Etiology_studies / Risk_factors_studies Limits: Aged / Female / Humans / Male / Middle aged Language: En Journal: Bone Joint J Year: 2021 Type: Article Affiliation country: United kingdom

Full text: 1 Collection: 01-internacional Database: MEDLINE Main subject: Prosthesis Design / Reoperation / Arthroplasty, Replacement, Hip / Polyethylene / Hip Prosthesis Type of study: Etiology_studies / Risk_factors_studies Limits: Aged / Female / Humans / Male / Middle aged Language: En Journal: Bone Joint J Year: 2021 Type: Article Affiliation country: United kingdom