Total Hip Arthroplasty Revision: Causes and Changes Over the Past Two Decades?
Abstract
Background: The revision of total hip arthroplasty (THA) is more challenging and has less successful outcomes than primary THA. Revision surgery takes more time, results in more blood loss, and has higher complication risks compared to primary surgery. Common reasons for revision include painful component loosening, implant failure, dislocations, infections, and periprosthetic fractures. Advances in surgical methods, implant designs, and bone loss management have assisted surgeons in addressing the challenges of revision THA and improving outcomes for patients undergoing this complex procedure.
Methods: In this retrospective cohort study, the THA revision surgeries of two groups conducted two decades apart were evaluated. All patient data, including age, gender, date of primary THA, date of revision surgery, reason for revision, and detailed intraoperative findings were recorded.
Results: The demographics were similar in both groups, but the average age was statistically significantly different (p<0.001). In the first group, it was 55.4 years, while in the second group, it was 63.5 years. The most common reason for revision in both groups was aseptic loosening. Infection, dislocation, and periprosthetic fractures were other reasons for revision.
Conclusion: The data indicate that dislocations have constituted a decreasing proportion of revision causes over time, likely attributable to improvements in surgical techniques, advancements in implant design, and the utilization of constrained liners. Nonetheless, infection persists as a significant challenge.
Keywords
Revision Surgery , Total Hip Arthroplasty , Prosthesis Loosening.
References
- Ferguson RJ, Palmer AJ, Taylor A, Porter ML, Malchau H, Glyn-Jones S. Hip replacement. Lancet. 2018;392(10158):1662-71.
- Singh JA, Yu S, Chen L, Cleveland JD. Rates of Total Joint Replacement in the United States: Future Projections to 2020-2040 Using the National Inpatient Sample. J Rheumatol. 2019;46(9):1134-40.
- Knight SR, Aujla R, Biswas SP. Total Hip Arthroplasty - over 100 years of operative history. Orthop Rev (Pavia). 2011;3(2):e16.
- Eynon-Lewis NJ, Ferry D, Pearse MF. Themistocles Gluck: an unrecognised genius. BMJ. 1992;305(6868):1534-6. Charnley J. Long-term results of low-friction arthroplasty. Hip. 1982:42-9.
- Bota NC, Nistor DV, Caterev S, Todor A. Historical overview of hip arthroplasty: From humble beginnings to a high-tech future. Orthop Rev (Pavia). 2021;13(1):8773.
- Yanmiş I, Tunay S, Yildiz C, Solakoğlu C, Gür E. [Our clinical experience with non-cemented total hip revision arthroplasty]. Acta Orthop Traumatol Turc. 2003;37(1):1-8.
- Rowan FE, Benjamin B, Pietrak JR, Haddad FS. Prevention of Dislocation After Total Hip Arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty. 2018;33(5):1316-24.
- Altıntaş F, Uç, Özler T. Total kalça artroplastisinde mekanik art sorunlar. TOTBİD Dergisi. 2013:254-67.
- Azboy İ, Yalvaç ES, Azboy N, Şahin İ, Zehir S. [Preferences of surgeons in total knee and hip arthroplasty, and operating room facilities in Turkey: a survey]. Eklem Hastalik Cerrahisi. 2016;27(1):34-40.
- Girdlestone GR. The role of fusion operations as applied to the hip-joint. Br Med J. 1933;2(3799):777-88.