TOTAL HIP REPLACEMENT – THESE TIMES THEY ARE A CHANGING?

Abstract

Hip arthroplasty has its true genesis in 1962 when the Charnley Total Hip was first implanted. The system comprised a stainless steel femoral stem with fixed 22,225mm head articulating against an all polyethylene acetabular cup. Both components were fixed in position with acrylic bone cement. There have been a number of changes in design, materials and surgical technique but the essential concept remains the same. The system was widely used by both senior and junior surgeons. Numerically implantations peaked at ~45,000 per annum in the late1980’s and is still at around ~25,000 per annum in the mid 2000’s. Geographically the system was used in all five continents. Patients varied widely both in age, activity, and diagnosis. It would therefore seem an appropriate vehicle to examine the variations in results of total hip replacement by patient profile, geography, and era of implantation.

A search was carried out on the US NCBI website for publications reporting on results with the Charnley system up to the end of 2002, and which comprised a follow-up of more than 10 years, and gave survivorship data. This resulted in 28 papers with 14 countries of origin available for review. For all studies basic data such as age and diagnosis, range implantation dates, likely specific design of prosthesis, origin of study and number in study was either reported or could be deduced. A ten year survivorship was reported in 16 studies for stem and cup and 7 for stem only. If the longest follow-up was considered for each study then 18 reported on stem and cup (9392 hips, implanted 1962–92) and 15 on stem only (4243 hips, implanted 1966–91). A total of 11 studies had four of more points on a survivorship curve, seven with stem and cup, four with stem only.

There are a number of points of interest in this data. The first is that with one exception the performance is remarkably consistent as shown by the survivorship curves. There is no significant difference in the survival rates from different centres, countries, and with implantation dates ranging from 1962 through to 1992. Secondly, there appears to have been little or no change in the average age of patients with implant date. There is some evidence to indicate from the 10 year data that failure rate per year is lower in older patients but does not seem to be affected by implantation date. The latter despite the fact that both surgical technique and component design changed over the 30 year implantation period. A further observation is that the failure rate per year is lower in studies with greater numbers of patients.

The general conclusion from this review is that the Charnley Total Hip is remarkably consistent in its performance both over time and location of implantation. Its performance also seems to have been affected very little by changes in technique or design.