We investigated the revision rates of primary total hip replacement (THR) reported in the National Joint Registry (NJR) by types of bearing surfaces used.

We analysed THR procedures across all orthopaedic units in England and Wales. Our analyses estimated all-cause and cause-specific revision rates. We identified primary THRs with heads and monobloc cups or modular acetabular component THRs with head and shell/liner combinations. We used flexible parametric survival models to estimate adjusted hazard ratios (HR).

A total of 1,026,481 primary THRs performed between 2003–2019 are included in the primary analysis (Monobloc: n=378,979 and Modular: n=647,502) with 20,869 (2%) of these primary THRs subsequently undergoing a revision episode (Monobloc: n=7,381 and Modular: n=13,488).

Compared to implants with a cobalt chrome head and highly crosslinked polyethylene (HCLPE) cup, the all-cause risk of revision for monobloc acetabular implant was higher for patients with cobalt chrome or stainless steel head and non-HCLPE cup. The risk of revision was lower for patients with a delta ceramic head and HCLPE cup implant, at any post-operative period.

Compared to patients with a cobalt chrome head and HCLPE liner primary THR, the all-cause risk of revision for modular acetabular implant varied non-constantly. THRs with a delta ceramic or oxidised zirconium head and HCLPE liner had a lower risk of revision throughout the entire post-operative period.

The all-cause and indication-specific risk of prosthesis revision, at different time points following the initial implantation, is lower for implants with a delta ceramic or oxidised zirconium head and a HCLPE liner/cup than commonly used alternatives such as cobalt chrome heads and HCLPE liner/cup.

Hip bearing surfaces materials are typically broadly reported in national registry (metal-on-polyethylene, ceramic-on-ceramic etc). We investigated the revision rates of primary total hip replacement (THR) reported in the National Joint Registry (NJR) by detailed types of bearing surfaces used.

We analysed THR procedures across all orthopaedic units in England and Wales. Our analyses estimated all-cause and cause-specific revision rates. We identified primary THRs with heads and monobloc cups or modular acetabular component THRs with detailed head and shell/liner bearing material combinations. We used flexible parametric survival models to estimate adjusted hazard ratios (HR).

A total of 1,026,481 primary THRs performed between 2003–2019 were included in the primary analysis (Monobloc cups: n=378,979 and Modular cups: n=647,502) with 20,869 (2%) of these primary THRs subsequently undergoing a revision episode (Monobloc: n=7,381 and Modular: n=13,488).

Compared to implants with a cobalt chrome head and highly crosslinked polyethylene (HCLPE) cup, the overall risk of revision for monobloc acetabular implant was higher for patients with cobalt chrome or stainless steel head and non-HCLPE cup. The risk of revision was lower for patients with a delta ceramic head and HCLPE cup implant, at any post-operative period.

Compared to patients with a cobalt chrome head and HCLPE liner primary THR, the overall risk of revision for modular acetabular implant varied non-constantly. THRs with a delta ceramic or oxidised zirconium head and HCLPE liner had a lower risk of revision throughout the entire post-operative period.

The overall and indication-specific risk of prosthesis revision, at different time points following the initial implantation, is reduced for implants with a delta ceramic or oxidised zirconium head and a HCLPE liner/cup in reference to THRs with a cobalt chrome head and HCLPE liner/cup.

Implants in total hip replacement (THR) are associated with different clinical and cost-effectiveness profiles,. We estimate the costs and outcomes for NHS patients in the year after THR associated with implant bearing materials using linked routinely collected data.

We linked NJR primary elective THR patients for osteoarthritis to HES and National PROMs. We estimated health care costs, health-related quality of life indices, and revision risks, in the year after primary and revision THRs overall. We used generalised linear models adjusting for patient and hospital characteristics and estimated 10-year cumulative probability of revision. We imputed utilities using chained equations for half the sample with missing PROMS.

We linked 577,973 elective primary THRs and 11,812 subsequent revisions. One year after primary THR, patients with the cemented THRs using cobalt chrome or stainless steel head with HCLPE liner/cup cost the NHS, on average, £13,101 (95%CI £13,080,£13,122), had an average quality-of-life score of 0.788 (95%CI 0.787,0.788), and a 10-year revision probability of 1.9% (95%CI 1.6,2.3). Compared to the reference, patients receiving a cemented THR with delta ceramic head and HCLPE liner/cup, hybrid THR with delta ceramic head and HCLPE liner/cup, and hybrid THR with alumina head and HCLPE liner/cup had lower 1-year costs (-£572 \[95% CI -£775,-£385\], -£346 \[-£501,-£192\], -£371 \[-£574,-£168\] respectively), better quality of life (0.007 \[95% CI 0.003,0.011\], 0.013 \[0.010,0.016\], 0.009 \[0.005,0.013\] respectively), and lower 10-year revision probabilities (1.4% \[1.03,2.0\], 1.5 \[1.3,1.7\], 1.6%\[1.2,2.1\] respectively).

Implant bearing materials are associated with varying mean costs and health outcomes after primary THR. Ours is the first study to derive costs and health outcomes from large, linked databases using multiple imputation methods to deal with bias. Our findings are useful for commissioning and procurement decisions and to inform a subsequent cost-effectiveness model with more granular detail on THR implant types.

Introduction

Computer hexapod assisted orthopaedic surgery (CHAOS) has previously been shown to provide a predictable and safe method for correcting multiplanar femoral deformity. We report the outcomes of tibial deformity correction using CHAOS, as well as a new cohort of femoral CHAOS procedures.

Abstract

Objectives

Modular dual-mobility (MDM) constructs are used to reduce dislocation rates after total hip replacement (THR). They combine the advantages of dual mobility with the option of supplementary acetabular screw fixation in complex revision surgery. However, there are concerns about adverse reaction to metal debris (ARMD) as a result of fretting corrosion between the metal liner and shell. Methods: The aim of this systematic review was to find and review all relevant studies to establish the outcomes and risks associated with MDM hip replacement. All articles on MDM THRs in the Medline, EMBASE, CINAHL, Cochrane Library, and Prospero databases were searched. A total of 14 articles were included. A random intercept logistic regression model was used for meta-analysis, giving estimated average values. Results: There were 6 cases of ARMD out of 1312 total. Estimated median incidence of ARMD from meta-analysis was 0.3% (95% CI 0.1 – 1.4%). Mean postoperative serum Cobalt was 0.81 μg/L (95% CI 0.33 – 1.29 μg/L), and Chromium was 0.77 μg/L (95% 0.35 – 1.19 μg/L), from 279 cases in 7 studies. Estimated median incidence of a serum cobalt or chromium ion measurement ≥1 μg/L was 7.9% (95% CI 3.5 – 16.8%), and ≥7 μg/L was 1.8% (95% CI 0.7 – 4.2%). Conclusions: ARMD is a rare but significant complication following total hip replacement using a MDM construct. Its incidence appears higher than that reported in non-metal-on-metal (MoM) hip replacements but lower than that of MoM hip replacements. MDM hip replacements are associated with raised serum metal ion levels postoperatively, but there was no correlation with worse clinical hip function within studies. Studies were poor quality and at high risk of confounding. Pending further work, MDM constructs should be used with caution, reserved for select cases at particularly high risk of dislocation.

The proximal humerus is the third most common site for primary sarcoma of bone. Since the 1970’s the treatment of primary bone sarcoma has changed from amputation to limb salvage. This has been due to advances in chemotherapy, imaging and surgical techniques. The literature has shown that the survival after limb salvage is similar to that of amputation. The optimum method of reconstruction of the shoulder remains controversial. The aim of our study was to review the cases of primary bone sarcoma of the proximal humerus treated at Middlemore Hospital.

The New Zealand Bone Tumour Registry was searched for all lesions of the proximal humerus, with the diagnosis of chondrosarcoma, Ewing’s sarcoma or osteosarcoma. These records were reviewed for presentation status, biopsy, and type of reconstruct ion, chemotherapy, complications and recurrence. Outcomes measured in months of disease free survival and overall survival.

The Bone Tumour Registry identified 29 patients who were treated at Middlemore Hospital with the primary diagnosis of Ewing’s sarcoma, chondrosarcoma or osteosarcoma of the proximal humerus. Results were available for 26 of the 29 patients (90% follow-up). Of these 29 patients six had chondrosarcoma, four Ewing’s sarcoma and 19 osteosarcoma. The patients with chondrosarcoma had an average age of 50 years. three patients were treated with endoprosthesis (mean survival 48 months) and one with vascularised fibula reconstruction (status 27 months ANED). Of the four patients with Ewing’s sarcoma, two had surgical reconstruction, one with intercalary allograft reconstruction (status 96 months ANED) and one with endoprosthesis (status 84 months ANED). The 19 patients with osteosarcoma had an average age 27 years, 15 patients were treated surgically. Three had endoprosthetic reconstruction (mean survival 29 months), two allograft prosthetic composite reconstruction (mean survival 23 months), three vascularised fibula reconstruction (mean survival 217 months), one total shoulder replacement and proximal humeral autograft (status 68 months ANED), one hemiarthroplasty (status 21 months DOD) and one proximal humeral allograft (status 31 months ANED). 4 patients were treated with primary amputation (mean survival 55.25 months).

The mean overall survival for limb salvage surgery in our institution is 74 months compared to 55.25 months for amputation; this is consistent with the published literature. Function of a salvaged upper limb is superior to amputation. A salvaged limb is socially and emotionally more acceptable for patients than amputation. Limb salvage remains the priority in the treatment of primary bone tumours of the proximal humerus.