Increased risk of early failure of multiply revised total hip arthroplasty.

IF 4.8 1区 医学 Q1 ORTHOPEDICS
Taisha Marie D'Apollonio, Marieke L T Hopman, Thomas Sullivan, John Matthew Abrahams, Neil P Sheth, Lucian Bogdan Solomon, Stuart Adam Callary
{"title":"Increased risk of early failure of multiply revised total hip arthroplasty.","authors":"Taisha Marie D'Apollonio, Marieke L T Hopman, Thomas Sullivan, John Matthew Abrahams, Neil P Sheth, Lucian Bogdan Solomon, Stuart Adam Callary","doi":"10.1302/0301-620X.108B8.BJJ-2025-1379.R2","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Aims: </strong>As the demand for revision total hip arthroplasty (rTHA) grows, understanding how successive revision procedures influence implant survivorship and patient outcomes becomes increasingly important. This study aimed to evaluate the association between revision number and implant survivorship following aseptic rTHA.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We analyzed 845 aseptic rTHAs performed between January 2003 and December 2023. Index primary THA dates, rTHA sequence, and reoperations were sourced and verified using hospital records, national registry data, and radiological records. Cases were stratified by revision number: first (R1), second (R2), or third and beyond (R3+). Re-revision risk was evaluated using cumulative incidence functions and Fine-Gray competing-risk regression, with death treated as a competing event.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of 845 rTHAs (717 patients), 838 (710 patients) with confirmed index THA were included: 598 R1, 155 R2, and 85 R3+. At two years, cumulative incidence of re-revision was 10.2% (95% CI 8.0 to 12.9) for R1, 14.2% (95% CI 9.6 to 20.8) for R2, and 17.7% (95% CI 11.0 to 27.7) for R3+. Unadjusted competing-risk regression demonstrated a higher cumulative incidence of re-revision in R2s compared with R1s. However, after multivariable adjustment, revision number was not independently associated with a statistically significant increase in re-revision risk. Across all revision groups, the highest risk of failure occurred within the first two postoperative years, particularly following rTHA for instability.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Re-revision following aseptic rTHA occurs most frequently within the first two postoperative years, with instability representing the dominant mode of early failure. Although multiply revised hips demonstrate poorer survivorship in unadjusted analyses, competing-risk models substantiated that rTHA number alone was not independently associated with a significantly increased risk of re-revision. These findings emphasize the importance of early risk mitigation strategies and informed patient counselling in the setting of repeated rTHA.</p>","PeriodicalId":48944,"journal":{"name":"Bone & Joint Journal","volume":"108-B 8","pages":"1003-1011"},"PeriodicalIF":4.8000,"publicationDate":"2026-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Bone & Joint Journal","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1302/0301-620X.108B8.BJJ-2025-1379.R2","RegionNum":1,"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

Aims: As the demand for revision total hip arthroplasty (rTHA) grows, understanding how successive revision procedures influence implant survivorship and patient outcomes becomes increasingly important. This study aimed to evaluate the association between revision number and implant survivorship following aseptic rTHA.

Methods: We analyzed 845 aseptic rTHAs performed between January 2003 and December 2023. Index primary THA dates, rTHA sequence, and reoperations were sourced and verified using hospital records, national registry data, and radiological records. Cases were stratified by revision number: first (R1), second (R2), or third and beyond (R3+). Re-revision risk was evaluated using cumulative incidence functions and Fine-Gray competing-risk regression, with death treated as a competing event.

Results: Of 845 rTHAs (717 patients), 838 (710 patients) with confirmed index THA were included: 598 R1, 155 R2, and 85 R3+. At two years, cumulative incidence of re-revision was 10.2% (95% CI 8.0 to 12.9) for R1, 14.2% (95% CI 9.6 to 20.8) for R2, and 17.7% (95% CI 11.0 to 27.7) for R3+. Unadjusted competing-risk regression demonstrated a higher cumulative incidence of re-revision in R2s compared with R1s. However, after multivariable adjustment, revision number was not independently associated with a statistically significant increase in re-revision risk. Across all revision groups, the highest risk of failure occurred within the first two postoperative years, particularly following rTHA for instability.

Conclusion: Re-revision following aseptic rTHA occurs most frequently within the first two postoperative years, with instability representing the dominant mode of early failure. Although multiply revised hips demonstrate poorer survivorship in unadjusted analyses, competing-risk models substantiated that rTHA number alone was not independently associated with a significantly increased risk of re-revision. These findings emphasize the importance of early risk mitigation strategies and informed patient counselling in the setting of repeated rTHA.

多次翻修全髋关节置换术早期失败的风险增加。
目的:随着翻修全髋关节置换术(rTHA)需求的增长,了解连续翻修手术如何影响植入物存活和患者预后变得越来越重要。本研究旨在评估无菌rTHA后翻修次数与种植体存活之间的关系。方法:分析2003年1月至2023年12月间进行的845例无菌rtha手术。检索主要THA日期、rTHA序列和再手术,并使用医院记录、国家登记数据和放射记录进行验证。病例按修订号分层:第一次(R1),第二次(R2)或第三次及以上(R3+)。使用累积关联函数和Fine-Gray竞争风险回归评估重新修订风险,死亡被视为竞争事件。结果:845例rtha(717例)中,838例(710例)确诊为指数THA: R1 598例,R2 155例,R3+ 85例。两年时,R1组的再修正累积发生率为10.2% (95% CI 8.0 - 12.9), R2组为14.2% (95% CI 9.6 - 20.8), R3+组为17.7% (95% CI 11.0 - 27.7)。未经调整的竞争风险回归显示,与R1s相比,R2s的重复复习的累积发生率更高。然而,在多变量调整后,修订次数与再次修订风险的增加并无统计学意义的独立相关。在所有翻修组中,最高的失败风险发生在术后头两年,特别是rTHA术后不稳定。结论:无菌rTHA术后再翻修最常发生在术后头两年,不稳定性是早期失败的主要模式。尽管在未经调整的分析中,多次髋关节翻修显示出较差的生存率,但竞争风险模型证实,仅rTHA数量与再次翻修风险的显著增加并不独立相关。这些发现强调了在重复rTHA的情况下,早期风险缓解策略和知情患者咨询的重要性。
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
Bone & Joint Journal
Bone & Joint Journal ORTHOPEDICS-SURGERY
CiteScore
9.40
自引率
10.90%
发文量
318
期刊介绍: We welcome original articles from any part of the world. The papers are assessed by members of the Editorial Board and our international panel of expert reviewers, then either accepted for publication or rejected by the Editor. We receive over 2000 submissions each year and accept about 250 for publication, many after revisions recommended by the reviewers, editors or statistical advisers. A decision usually takes between six and eight weeks. Each paper is assessed by two reviewers with a special interest in the subject covered by the paper, and also by members of the editorial team. Controversial papers will be discussed at a full meeting of the Editorial Board. Publication is between four and six months after acceptance.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书