Cumulative risk of revision after primary total hip arthroplasty in registries internationally: systematic review and meta-analysis of selected hip stems and cups.

IF 4.3 2区 医学 Q1 ORTHOPEDICS
Christophe Combescure, James A Smith, Christophe Barea, Lotje A Hoogervorst, Rob Nelissen, Perla J Marang-van de Mheen, Anne Lübbeke
{"title":"Cumulative risk of revision after primary total hip arthroplasty in registries internationally: systematic review and meta-analysis of selected hip stems and cups.","authors":"Christophe Combescure, James A Smith, Christophe Barea, Lotje A Hoogervorst, Rob Nelissen, Perla J Marang-van de Mheen, Anne Lübbeke","doi":"10.1530/EOR-2024-0020","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>The objective was to investigate the consistency in cumulative revision rates (CRRs) for a selection of total hip arthroplasty cups and stems across national/regional hip arthroplasty registries worldwide.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Ten cups and ten stems from total hip systems were randomly selected. Two frequently used implants across registries were added, totalling 11 cups and 11 stems. CRRs and 95% CIs were extracted from the latest annual registry reports using these implants. CRRs were pooled for each cup or stem, and differences between cup-stem combinations and between registries were investigated.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>CRRs were available for ten cups and eight stems from eight registries, totalling 552,148 cups and 727,447 stems. Follow-up was 1-20 years. The 5-year CRR pooled for all cups was 2.9% (95% CI: 2.3-3.6) and for all stems, 3.0% (95% CI: 2.4-3.8). Homogeneous (consistent) CRRs with respect to both associated implant and country were observed for two cups and three stems. Significant differences in CRR were identified in one cup by associated implant only, in one cup by registry only, and in two cups and four stems for both. Sparse data prevented evaluation of four cups and one stem.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Registries' annual reports provide a large amount of publicly available information on CRRs of specific implants. These CRRs can be synthesised to improve the assessment of implant performance over time. Our CRR analysis represents a promising approach to detect implants with a consistent low- or high-risk pattern across registries.</p>","PeriodicalId":48598,"journal":{"name":"Efort Open Reviews","volume":"10 5","pages":"277-285"},"PeriodicalIF":4.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12061013/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Efort Open Reviews","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1530/EOR-2024-0020","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: The objective was to investigate the consistency in cumulative revision rates (CRRs) for a selection of total hip arthroplasty cups and stems across national/regional hip arthroplasty registries worldwide.

Methods: Ten cups and ten stems from total hip systems were randomly selected. Two frequently used implants across registries were added, totalling 11 cups and 11 stems. CRRs and 95% CIs were extracted from the latest annual registry reports using these implants. CRRs were pooled for each cup or stem, and differences between cup-stem combinations and between registries were investigated.

Results: CRRs were available for ten cups and eight stems from eight registries, totalling 552,148 cups and 727,447 stems. Follow-up was 1-20 years. The 5-year CRR pooled for all cups was 2.9% (95% CI: 2.3-3.6) and for all stems, 3.0% (95% CI: 2.4-3.8). Homogeneous (consistent) CRRs with respect to both associated implant and country were observed for two cups and three stems. Significant differences in CRR were identified in one cup by associated implant only, in one cup by registry only, and in two cups and four stems for both. Sparse data prevented evaluation of four cups and one stem.

Conclusion: Registries' annual reports provide a large amount of publicly available information on CRRs of specific implants. These CRRs can be synthesised to improve the assessment of implant performance over time. Our CRR analysis represents a promising approach to detect implants with a consistent low- or high-risk pattern across registries.

在国际注册中心,初次全髋关节置换术后翻修的累积风险:对选定的髋关节干和髋关节杯的系统回顾和荟萃分析。
目的:目的是调查全球范围内国家/地区髋关节置换术登记中心选择的全髋关节置换术杯和柄的累积翻修率(CRRs)的一致性。方法:随机选择全髋关节10个杯和10个干。在注册表中添加了两个常用的植入物,总共11个杯和11个茎。从使用这些植入物的最新年度登记报告中提取crr和95% ci。对每个杯或茎的crr进行汇总,并调查杯干组合之间和不同登记间的差异。结果:从8个注册中心获得10个杯和8个茎的crr,共计552,148个杯和727,447个茎。随访1 ~ 20年。所有杯杯的5年CRR为2.9% (95% CI: 2.3-3.6),所有茎干的5年CRR为3.0% (95% CI: 2.4-3.8)。对于两个杯和三个茎,观察到相关种植体和国家的均匀(一致)crr。在一个杯子中,仅通过相关种植体,在一个杯子中仅通过注册,在两个杯子和四个茎中都发现了显著的CRR差异。稀疏的数据妨碍了对四个杯和一个茎的评估。结论:注册中心的年度报告提供了大量关于特定种植体crr的公开信息。随着时间的推移,可以综合这些crr来改进对植入物性能的评估。我们的CRR分析代表了一种有希望的方法来检测具有一致的低或高风险模式的植入物。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Efort Open Reviews
Efort Open Reviews Medicine-Orthopedics and Sports Medicine
CiteScore
6.60
自引率
2.90%
发文量
101
审稿时长
13 weeks
期刊介绍: EFORT Open Reviews publishes high-quality instructional review articles across the whole field of orthopaedics and traumatology. Commissioned, peer-reviewed articles from international experts summarize current knowledge and practice in orthopaedics, with the aim of providing systematic coverage of the field. All articles undergo rigorous scientific editing to ensure the highest standards of accuracy and clarity. This continuously published online journal is fully open access and will provide integrated CME. It is an authoritative resource for educating trainees and supports practising orthopaedic surgeons in keeping informed about the latest clinical and scientific advances. One print issue containing a selection of papers from the journal will be published each year to coincide with the EFORT Annual Congress. EFORT Open Reviews is the official journal of the European Federation of National Associations of Orthopaedics and Traumatology (EFORT) and is published in partnership with The British Editorial Society of Bone & Joint Surgery.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信