Design-related risk factors for revision of primary cemented stems
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.3109/17453674.2010.501739Abstract
Background and purpose Even small design variables of the femoral stem may influence the outcome of a hip arthroplasty. We investigated whether design-related factors play any role in the risk of non-aseptic revision of the 3 most frequently used primary cemented stem designs in the Swedish Hip Arthroplasty Register. Patients and methods We studied 71,184 primary cemented femoral stem implants (21,008 Exeter polished stems, 43,036 Lubinus SPII stems, and 7,140 Spectron EF Primary stems) that were inserted from 1999 through 2006. Design-specific characteristics were analyzed using separate Cox regression models that were adjusted for sex, age, diagnosis, incision, and number of operations (first vs. second). Results The crude revision rate varied between 0.8% (Lubinus SPII) and 1.4% (Spectron Primary). For the Exeter stem, the smallest femoral head diameter (22 mm) was associated with a higher risk of revision. No other design-specific parameters influenced the risk of revision of the Exeter stem. The smallest Lubinus stem size, a stem with extended neck length combined with a femoral head with increasing neck length, or the use of a cobalt-chromium head had a negative influence on the outcome. For the Spectron stem, the risk of revision was elevated for the smallest stem and for increasing offset calculated as the combined effect of high offset design and increasing neck length. Interpretation Overall revision rates were low, but for two of the stems studied design factors such as size and neck length or offset influenced the risk of non-aseptic revision.Downloads
Download data is not yet available.
Downloads
Published
2010-08-01
How to Cite
Thien, T. M., & Kärrholm, J. (2010). Design-related risk factors for revision of primary cemented stems. Acta Orthopaedica, 81(4), 407–412. https://doi.org/10.3109/17453674.2010.501739
Issue
Section
Articles
License
LicenseActa Orthopaedica (Scandinavica) content is available freely online as from volume 1, 1930. The journal owner owns the copyright for all material published until volume 80, 2009. As of June 2009, the journal has however been published fully Open Access, meaning the authors retain copyright to their work. As of June 2009, articles have been published under CC-BY-NC or CC-BY licenses, unless otherwise specified.