Outcome in design-specific comparisons between highly crosslinked and conventional polyethylene in total hip arthroplasty: 163,368 hip replacements in the Nordic Arthroplasty Register Association database with 5–11 years of follow-up
Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskrift › Tidsskriftartikel › Forskning › fagfællebedømt
Standard
Outcome in design-specific comparisons between highly crosslinked and conventional polyethylene in total hip arthroplasty : 163,368 hip replacements in the Nordic Arthroplasty Register Association database with 5–11 years of follow-up. / Johanson, Per-Erik; Furnes, Ove; Ivar Havelin, Leif; Fenstad, Anne Marie; Pedersen, Alma B.; Overgaard, Søren; Garellick, Göran; Mäkelä, Keijo; Kärrholm, Johan.
I: Acta Orthopaedica (Print Edition), Bind 88, Nr. 4, 04.07.2017, s. 363-369.Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskrift › Tidsskriftartikel › Forskning › fagfællebedømt
Harvard
APA
Vancouver
Author
Bibtex
}
RIS
TY - JOUR
T1 - Outcome in design-specific comparisons between highly crosslinked and conventional polyethylene in total hip arthroplasty
T2 - 163,368 hip replacements in the Nordic Arthroplasty Register Association database with 5–11 years of follow-up
AU - Johanson, Per-Erik
AU - Furnes, Ove
AU - Ivar Havelin, Leif
AU - Fenstad, Anne Marie
AU - Pedersen, Alma B.
AU - Overgaard, Søren
AU - Garellick, Göran
AU - Mäkelä, Keijo
AU - Kärrholm, Johan
PY - 2017/7/4
Y1 - 2017/7/4
N2 - Background and purpose - Most registry studies regarding highly crosslinked polyethylene (XLPE) have focused on the overall revision risk. We compared the risk of cup and/or liner revision for specific cup and liner designs made of either XLPE or conventional polyethylene (CPE), regarding revision for any reason and revision due to aseptic loosening and/or osteolysis. Patients and methods - Using the Nordic Arthroplasty Register Association (NARA) database, we identified cup and liner designs where either XLPE or CPE had been used in more than 500 THAs performed for primary hip osteoarthritis. We assessed risk of revision for any reason and for aseptic loosening using Cox regression adjusted for age, sex, femoral head material and size, surgical approach, stem fixation, and presence of hydroxyapatite coating (uncemented cups). Results - The CPE version of the ZCA cup had a risk of revision for any reason similar to that of the XLPE version (p = 0.09), but showed a 6-fold higher risk of revision for aseptic loosening (p < 0.001). The CPE version of the Reflection All Poly cup had an 8-fold elevated risk of revision for any reason (p < 0.001) and a 5-fold increased risk of revision for aseptic loosening (p < 0.001). The Charnley Elite Ogee/Marathon cup and the Trilogy cup did not show such differences. Interpretation - Whether XLPE has any advantage over CPE regarding revision risk may depend on the properties of the polyethylene materials being compared, as well as the respective cup designs, fixation type, and follow-up times. Further research is needed to elucidate how cup design factors interact with polyethylene type to affect the risk of revision.
AB - Background and purpose - Most registry studies regarding highly crosslinked polyethylene (XLPE) have focused on the overall revision risk. We compared the risk of cup and/or liner revision for specific cup and liner designs made of either XLPE or conventional polyethylene (CPE), regarding revision for any reason and revision due to aseptic loosening and/or osteolysis. Patients and methods - Using the Nordic Arthroplasty Register Association (NARA) database, we identified cup and liner designs where either XLPE or CPE had been used in more than 500 THAs performed for primary hip osteoarthritis. We assessed risk of revision for any reason and for aseptic loosening using Cox regression adjusted for age, sex, femoral head material and size, surgical approach, stem fixation, and presence of hydroxyapatite coating (uncemented cups). Results - The CPE version of the ZCA cup had a risk of revision for any reason similar to that of the XLPE version (p = 0.09), but showed a 6-fold higher risk of revision for aseptic loosening (p < 0.001). The CPE version of the Reflection All Poly cup had an 8-fold elevated risk of revision for any reason (p < 0.001) and a 5-fold increased risk of revision for aseptic loosening (p < 0.001). The Charnley Elite Ogee/Marathon cup and the Trilogy cup did not show such differences. Interpretation - Whether XLPE has any advantage over CPE regarding revision risk may depend on the properties of the polyethylene materials being compared, as well as the respective cup designs, fixation type, and follow-up times. Further research is needed to elucidate how cup design factors interact with polyethylene type to affect the risk of revision.
U2 - 10.1080/17453674.2017.1307676
DO - 10.1080/17453674.2017.1307676
M3 - Journal article
C2 - 28375671
VL - 88
SP - 363
EP - 369
JO - Acta Orthopaedica
JF - Acta Orthopaedica
SN - 1745-3674
IS - 4
ER -
ID: 252058822