30-Years of experience with the cementless implanted Alloclassic CSF screw cup total hip arthroplasty system - An ultra-long-term follow-up

The impact of failed novel technology and technical errors on the revision burden in total hip arthroplasty: what percentage of revision hip arthroplasty was potentially avoidable?

BACKGROUND

Despite the high success rate of total hip arthroplasty (THA), new implant technologies continue to be developed. Although potentially useful, such novel developments may result in unintended consequences, leading to revision surgery, often prematurely. In several instances, new technology that appeared promising was later found to be inferior to existing technology and resulting in early revision surgery. Additionally, technical surgical errors may also lead to early revisions. Some have argued that revisions related to such phenomena are potentially avoidable. The present analysis investigates to what extent the contribution of "failed new technology" and "technical errors" contributes to the revision burden and to the need for premature revision arthroplasty.

METHODS

We retrospectively analysed 432 revision THAs and categorised them as either "late revisions" based on survivorship of 10 years or "premature revisions". Among both cohorts, we determined what percentage of revisions were potentially avoidable and due to failed novel technologies and technical errors, and what percent were "unavoidable".

RESULTS

Of the 432 revisions, 267 (62%) were considered premature and 38% were considered late. Of the premature revisions, 108 were considered potentially avoidable (81 failed novel technologies, 27 technical errors).

CONCLUSIONS

Our data demonstrates that new technology and surgical techniques can result in premature failure of THA. Surgeons should take caution when incorporating new implant technology or surgical techniques into their practice.

Straight stem and threaded cup in patients under 60 years of age: 28.8-30.2 years of follow-up

Purpose

The aim of this retrospective observational study of one cohort was to evaluate the long-term outcome in patients younger than 60 years after total hip arthroplasty using a straight uncemented stem and an uncemented threaded cup.

Methods

Between 1986 and 1987, 75 hips of 75 patients (mean age, 53.35 ± 6.17 years) were consecutively implanted with an Alloclassic Zweymüller/Alloclassic SL stem and an Alloclassic CSF cup. Forty-four patients had died over the last 30 years. The remaining 31 patients (mean age, 82.9 ± 6.4 years) were reinvited for follow-up examinations. Clinical and radiographic evaluations were carried out.

Results

At a mean follow-up of 29.5 (28.8–30.2), 4 patients (5.3%) were lost to follow-up.

For the endpoint aseptic loosening (defined as the removal of stem or the cup for 2 cases), the overall survival rate is 97.3%. For the endpoint revision for any reason (22 patients), the survival rate is 70.6%. Eleven patients needed an exchange of head and liner, caused by wear. The average time from implantation until change of head and liner was 21.44 years (SD 5.92). Other reasons for revision surgery were septic loosening (3 cases), aseptic loosening of stem and cup (1 case), aseptic loosening of stem (1 case), periprosthetic calcification (2 cases), implant fracture (1 case), periprosthetic fracture (1 case), intraoperative fissure of stem (1 case), and total wear of liner including cup (1 case).

Conclusion

The combination of a straight stem (Alloclassic) and a screw cup (CSF) shows excellent results in young patients under the age of 60 at ultra-long-term follow-up at 30 years. Revisions due to wear of the polyethylene liner are more likely than in the older patients.

Surgeon-stratified cohort analysis of 1976 cementless Zweymüller total hip arthroplasties from a single hospital with 23,255 component years of follow-up

INTRODUCTION

The third-generation Zweymüller hip endoprosthesis has been used for decades with excellent results in arthroplasty registries, but surgeon-stratified reports on this implant are still scarce. The aim of the presented single-hospital cohort analysis of the third-generation Endoplus-Zweymüller primary total hip arthroplasty was to determine implant survival rates until the first revision/removal at 10/15/20/25 years after implantation and to find out whether implant survival depended on the operating surgeon, patient's age and gender, operated side (right/left), season of the year and the set of implanted components (SL-PLUS femur, BICON-PLUS acetabulum or both components).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The retrospective observational cohort study included 1976 consecutive patients with primary BICON/SL-PLUS Zweymüller hip endoprosthesis implanted at the same operating theater block of the University Medical Centre Ljubljana, Department of Orthopaedic Surgery (Ljubljana, Slovenia) between January 1, 1993 and May 1, 2014. Survival analyses were performed with the Kaplan-Meier method and the Cox regression analysis after minimum 5 and maximum 26 years of follow-up.

RESULTS

At 10/15/20/25 years after implantation, the cumulative proportion of revision-free surviving Zweymüller total hip endoprostheses was 92/90/85/81% and the cumulative proportion with unremoved immobile components was 93/91/87/84%, respectively. After adjustment for age, gender and operated side, less experienced surgeons (odds ratios 2.34-5.00), season of the year at primary implantation (spring vs. winter odds ratio 1.74) and the use of BICON-PLUS acetabulum with femoral stem from another manufacturer (odds ratio 2.23) were significant risk factors of worse implant survival.

CONCLUSIONS

The study presents the largest published third-generation Zweymüller BICON/SL-PLUS total hip arthroplasty cohort from a single non-developmental hospital with 23,255 component years of observation. Study findings indicate the impact of environmental factors at primary implantation and variability between different surgeons on the long-term implant survival.