Frequency of safety signals from scientific reports, manufactures, registers, and other sources for a random selection of hip and knee prostheses
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.2340/17453674.2025.44035Keywords:
Arthroplasty registries, Hip, Knee, Real-world data, Safety notices, Safety signalsAbstract
Background and purpose: The safety and performance of hip and knee prostheses can be assessed by analyzing peer-reviewed literature, registry reports, and safety notices published by national competent authorities/regulatory agencies, or manufacturers. The percentage of hip and knee prostheses with a safety signal published through any of these data sources is unknown. We aimed to assess the frequency of signals identified for a random sample of 10 hip stems, 10 hip cups, and 10 knee implants.
Methods: 3 literature libraries were searched to find safety signals defined as information on patterns/occurrences that may alter the device’s benefit–risk profile, reported in peer-reviewed publications for the randomly selected implants. Annual registry reports from 5 national registries were examined to check whether any of the selected implants had outlier performance. The CORE-MD post-market surveillance (PMS) tool was used to collect all related safety notices from 13 competent authority/regulatory agency websites. Manufacturers’ websites were screened for any reported safety information.
Results: Safety signals were identified for 21 of the 30 randomly selected implants: 18 identified by registries, 7 by the CORE-MD PMS tool, and 8 based on literature, with 10 implants identified by multiple sources. There was no systematic pattern in timing of publication with a particular source publishing safety signals earlier than other sources.
Conclusion: 70% of the randomly selected hip and knee prostheses had ≥ 1 safety signals published, with registries as the source for the majority. No single source identified all 21 implants with signals, which highlights the need for a comprehensive surveillance strategy to aggregate safety signals from multiple sources.
Downloads
References
Learmonth I D, Young C, Rorabeck C. The operation of the century: total hip replacement. Lancet 2007; 370(9597): 1508-19. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(07)60457-7. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(07)60457-7
Malahias M A, Iacobelli D A, Torres L, Rojas Marcos C, Nocon A A, Wright T M, et al. Early aseptic loosening with increased presence and severity of backside burnishing in the Optetrak Logic posterior-stabilized total knee arthroplasty femoral component. J Knee Surg 2022; 35(14): 1595-603. doi: 10.1055/s-0041-1729549. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0041-1729549
Kahlenberg C A, Lyman S, Joseph A D, Chiu Y F, Padgett D E. Comparison of patient-reported outcomes based on implant brand in total knee arthroplasty: a prospective cohort study. Bone Joint J 2019; 101-B(7_Supple_C): 48-54. doi: 10.1302/0301-620X.101B7.BJJ-2018-1382.R1. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1302/0301-620X.101B7.BJJ-2018-1382.R1
Pijls B G, Meessen J M T A, Tucker K, Stea S, Steenbergen L, Marie Fenstad A, et al. MoM total hip replacements in Europe: a NORE report. EFORT Open Rev 2019; 4(6): 423-9. doi: 10.1302/2058-5241.4.180078. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1302/2058-5241.4.180078
Berber R, Skinner J A, Hart A J. Management of metal-on-metal hip implant patients: who, when and how to revise? World J Orthop; 7(5): 272-9. doi: 10.5312/wjo.v7.i5.272. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5312/wjo.v7.i5.272
Pijls B G, Meessen J M T A, Schoones J W, Fiocco M, Van Der Heide H J L, Sedrakyan A, et al. Increased mortality in metal-on-metal versus non-metal-on-metal primary total hip arthroplasty at 10 years and longer follow-up: a systematic review and meta-analysis. PLOS One 2016; 11(6): e0156051. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0156051. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0156051
Matharu V K, Matharu G S. Metal-on-metal hip replacements: implications for general practice. Br J Gen Pract 2017; 67(665): 544-5. doi: 10.3399/bjgp17X693557. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3399/bjgp17X693557
Medical Device Coordination Group. Medical Device Regulation 2019. ANNEX III - Technical documentation on post-market surveillance. Available from: https://www.medical-device-regulation.eu/2019/07/25/annex-iii/.
International Medical Device Regulators Forum. Methodological Principles in the Use of International Medical Device Registry Data [Internet] 2016 [cited 2024 Nov 12]. Available from: https://www.imdrf.org/sites/default/files/2021-09/imdrf-cons-methodological-principles-imdrd.pdf.
Steiger R N D, Miller L N, Davidson D C, Ryan P, Graves S E. Joint registry approach for identification of outlier prostheses. Acta Orthop 2013; 84(4): 348-52. doi: 10.3109/17453674.2013.831320. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3109/17453674.2013.831320
National Joint Registry. implants [Internet]. [cited 2024 Nov 10]. Available from: https://reports.njrcentre.org.uk/2022/implants.
SoFCOT Total Hip Arthroplasty Register. Biennial Report 2020 [Internet] 2021. Available from: https://www.sofcot.fr/files/medias/documents/2020%20global%20biennial_report_2020_final.pdf.
Hoogervorst L A, Geurkink T H, Lübbeke A, Buccheri S, Schoones JW, Torre M, et al. Quality and utility of European cardiovascular and orthopaedic registries for the regulatory evaluation of medical device safety and performance across the implant lifecycle: a systematic review. Int J Health Policy Manag 2023; 12: 7648. doi: 10.34172/ijhpm.2023.7648. DOI: https://doi.org/10.34172/ijhpm.2023.7648
Lübbeke A, Combescure C, Barea C, Gonzalez A I, Tucker K, Kjærsgaard-Andersen P, et al. Clinical investigations to evaluate high-risk orthopaedic devices: a systematic review of the peer-reviewed medical literature. EFORT Open Rev 2023; 8(11): 781-91. doi: 10.1530/EOR-23-0024. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1530/EOR-23-0024
Regulation (EU) 2017/745 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 5 April 2017 on medical devices, amending Directive 2001/83/EC, Regulation (EC) No 178/2002 and Regulation (EC) No 1223/2009 and repealing Council Directives 90/385/EEC and 93/42/EEC (Text with EEA relevance) [Internet]. Mar 20, 2023. Available from: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2017/745/2023-03-20/eng.
Hoogervorst L A, Ren Y, Melvin T, Stratton-Powell A A, Lübbeke A, Geertsma R E, et al. Safety notices and registry outlier data measure different aspects of safety and performance of total knee implants: a comparative study of safety notices and register outliers. Acta Orthop 2024; 95: 667-76. doi: 10.2340/17453674.2024.42361. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2340/17453674.2024.42361
Ren Y, Caiani E G. Leveraging natural language processing to aggregate field safety notices of medical devices across the EU. Npj Digit Med 2024; 7(1): 352. doi: 10.1038/s41746-024-01337-9. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41746-024-01337-9
IMDRF Adverse Event Terminology Working Group. IMDRF terminologies for categorized Adverse Event Reporting (AER): terms, terminology structure and codes 2020; Available from: https://www.imdrf.org/sites/default/files/docs/imdrf/final/technical/imdrf-tech-200318-ae-terminologies-n43.pdf.
De Steiger R N, Hallstrom B R, Lübbeke A, Paxton E W, Van Steenbergen L N, Wilkinson M. Identification of implant outliers in joint replacement registries. EFORT Open Rev 2023; 8(1): 11-17. doi: 10.1530/eor-22-0058. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1530/EOR-22-0058
New Zealand Orthopaedic Association. Annual Reports | New Zealand Orthopaedic Association [Internet]. [cited 2025 Mar 29]. Available from: https://www.nzoa.org.nz/annual-reports.
Swedish Arthroplasty Register [Internet]. [cited 2025 Mar 29]. Available from: https://sar.registercentrum.se/.
Melnic C M, Aurigemma P, Lee J A, Dwyer M, Bedair H S. Catastrophic failure of a MiniHip femoral stem: a case report. JBJS Case Connect 2020; 10(1): e0270-e0270. doi: 10.2106/JBJS.CC.19.00270. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2106/JBJS.CC.19.00270
Warth L C, Grant T W, Naveen N B, Deckard E R, Ziemba-Davis M, Meneghini R M. Inadequate metadiaphyseal fill of a modern taper-wedge stem increases subsidence and risk of aseptic loosening: technique and distal canal fill matter! J Arthroplasty 2020; 35(7): 1868-76. doi: 10.1016/j.arth.2020.02.024. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arth.2020.02.024
Macheras G A, Lepetsos P, Galanakos S P, Papadakis S A, Poultsides L A, Karachalios T S. Early failure of an uncemented femoral stem, as compared to two other stems with similar design, following primary total hip arthroplasty performed with direct anterior approach. HIP Int 2022; 32(2): 166-73. doi: 10.1177/1120700020940671. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1120700020940671
Hoskins W, Rainbird S, Peng Y, Graves S E, Bingham R. The effect of surgical approach and femoral prosthesis type on revision rates following total hip arthroplasty: an analysis of the most commonly utilized cementless stems. J Bone Joint Surg 2022; 104(1): 24-32. doi: 10.2106/JBJS.21.00487. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2106/JBJS.21.00487
Kaipel M, Prenner A, Bachl S, Farr S, Sinz G. Migration characteristics and early clinical results of a novel-finned press-fit acetabular cup. Wien Klin Wochenschr 2014; 126. doi: 10.1007/s00508-013-0488-y. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00508-013-0488-y
Moretti B, Pesce V, Maccagnano G, Vicenti G, Lovreglio P, Soleo L, et al. Peripheral neuropathy after hip replacement failure: is vanadium the culprit? Lancet 2012; 379(9826): 1676. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(12)60273-6. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(12)60273-6
Kang B J, Ha Y C, Ham D W, Hwang S C, Lee Y K, Koo K H. Third-generation alumina-on-alumina total hip arthroplasty: 14 to 16-year follow-up study. J Arthroplasty 2015; 30(3): 411-15. doi: 10.1016/j.arth.2014.09.020. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arth.2014.09.020
Nam K W, Yoo J J, Lae Kim Y, Kim Y M, Lee M H, Kim H J. Alumina-debris-induced osteolysis in contemporary alumina-on-alumina total hip arthroplasty: a case report. J Bone Joint Surg 2007; 89(11): 2499-503. doi: 10.2106/JBJS.G.00130. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2106/JBJS.G.00130
Koo K H, Ha Y C, Jung W H, Kim S R, Yoo J J, Kim H J. Isolated fracture of the ceramic head after third-generation alumina-on-alumina total hip arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg 2008; 90(2): 329-36. doi: 10.2106/JBJS.F.01489. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2106/JBJS.F.01489
Keogh C J, Keohane D, Harty J A, Mulcahy D. Nontraumatic tibial polyethylene insert cone fracture in rotating-platform total knee arthroplasty. Arthroplasty Today 2021; 8: 283-288.e1. doi: 10.1016/j.artd.2021.02.013. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.artd.2021.02.013
Piepers M J, Van Hove R P, Van Den Bekerom M P, Nolte P A. Do refinements to original designs improve outcome of total knee replacement? A retrospective cohort study. J Orthop Surg 2014; 9(1): 7. doi: 10.1186/1749-799X-9-7. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/1749-799X-9-7
Gøthesen Ø, Espehaug B, Havelin L, Petursson G, Lygre S, Ellison P, et al. Survival rates and causes of revision in cemented primary total knee replacement: A report from the Norwegian Arthroplasty Register 1994-2009. Bone Joint J 2013 May 1; 95-B(5): 636-42. doi: 10.1302/0301-620X.95B5.30271. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1302/0301-620X.95B5.30271
Peltola M, Malmivaara A, Paavola M. Learning curve for new technology?: a nationwide register-based study of 46,363 total knee arthroplasties. J Bone Jt Surg 2013; 95(23): 2097-103. doi: 10.2106/JBJS.L.01296. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2106/JBJS.L.01296
Food and Drug Administration. FDA. FDA; [cited 2025 Jan 17]. Recalls, Corrections and Removals (Devices). Available from: https://www.fda.gov/medical-devices/postmarket-requirements-devices/recalls-corrections-and-removals-devices.
Medical Device Recalls [Internet]. [cited 2025 Mar 29]. Available from: https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cdrh/cfdocs/cfres/res.cfm.
Schmerler J, Bergstein V E, EINemer W, Harris A B, Khanuja H S, Srikumaran U, et al. The weight of complications: high and low BMI have disparate modes of failure in total hip arthroplasty. Arthroplasty 2024; 6(1): 9. doi: 10.1186/s42836-024-00233-7. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s42836-024-00233-7
Bigham W R, Lensing G S, Walters M M, Bhanat E, Keeney J A, Stronach B M. Outcomes of total knee arthroplasty revisions in obese and morbidly obese patient populations. J Arthroplasty 2023; 38(9): 1822-6. doi: 10.1016/j.arth.2023.03.017. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arth.2023.03.017
Hemmilä M, Karvonen M, Laaksonen I, Matilainen M, Eskelinen A, Haapakoski J, et al. Survival of 11,390 Continuum cups in primary total hip arthroplasty based on data from the Finnish Arthroplasty Register. Acta Orthop 2019; 90(4): 312-7. doi: 10.1080/17453674.2019.1603596. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/17453674.2019.1603596
Pakarinen O A, Neuvonen P S, Reito A R P, Eskelinen A P. Increased risk for dislocation after introduction of the Continuum cup system: lessons learnt from a cohort of 1,381 THRs after 1-year follow-up. Acta Orthop 2020; 91(3): 279-85. doi: 10.1080/17453674.2020.1744981. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/17453674.2020.1744981
Davis J J, Cross E, Crowley J. Pharmaceutical websites and the communication of risk information. J Health Commun 2007; 12(1): 29-39. doi: 10.1080/10810730601091326. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/10810730601091326
Kim K, Lee J, Yoo J J, Kim H J. Gross trunnion failure in the bipolar hemiarthroplasty; raising concern about short trunnion: a case report. Hip Pelvis 2021; 33(1): 40-4. doi: 10.5371/hp.2021.33.1.40. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5371/hp.2021.33.1.40
Bengoa F J, Howard L C, Neufeld M E, Garbuz D S. Malseating of modular dual mobility liners: high prevalence in revision total hip arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 2023; 38(7): S211-6. doi: 10.1016/j.arth.2023.03.094. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arth.2023.03.094
Additional Files
Published
How to Cite
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Yijun Ren, Lotje A Hoogervorst, Enrico G Caiani, Perla J Marang-van de Mheen, James A Smith, Alan G Fraser, Rob G H H Nelissen, Anne Lübbeke
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
