Cargando…

Functional Outcome, Revision Rates and Mortality after Primary Total Hip Replacement – A National Comparison of Nine Prosthesis Brands in England

BACKGROUND: The number of prosthesis brands used for hip replacement has increased rapidly, but there is little evidence on their effectiveness. We compared patient-reported outcomes, revision rates, and mortality for the three most frequently used brands within each prosthesis type: cemented (Exete...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Pennington, Mark, Grieve, Richard, Black, Nick, van der Meulen, Jan H.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Public Library of Science 2013
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3762902/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24023837
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0073228
_version_ 1782282954270048256
author Pennington, Mark
Grieve, Richard
Black, Nick
van der Meulen, Jan H.
author_facet Pennington, Mark
Grieve, Richard
Black, Nick
van der Meulen, Jan H.
author_sort Pennington, Mark
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: The number of prosthesis brands used for hip replacement has increased rapidly, but there is little evidence on their effectiveness. We compared patient-reported outcomes, revision rates, and mortality for the three most frequently used brands within each prosthesis type: cemented (Exeter V40 Contemporary, Exeter V40 Duration and Exeter V40 Elite Plus Ogee), cementless (Corail Pinnacle, Accolade Trident, and Taperloc Exceed), and hybrid (Exeter V40 Trilogy, Exeter V40 Trilogy, and CPT Trilogy). METHODS AND FINDINGS: We used three national databases of patients who had hip replacements between 2008 and 2011 in the English NHS to compare functional outcome (Oxford Hip Score (OHS) ranging from 0 (worst) to 48 (best)) in 43,524 patients at six months. We analysed revisions and mortality in 187,201 patients. We used multiple regression to adjust for pre-operative differences. Prosthesis type had an impact on post-operative OHS and revision rates (both p<0.001). Patients with hybrid prostheses had the best functional outcome (mean OHS 39.4, 95%CI 39.1 to 39.7) and those with cemented prostheses the worst (37.7, 37.3 to 38.1). Patients with cemented prostheses had the lowest reported 5-year revision rates (1.3%, 1.2% to 1.4%) and those with cementless prostheses the highest (2.2%, 2.1% to 2.4%). Differences in mortality according to prosthesis type were small and not significant (p = 0.06). Functional outcome varied according to brand among cemented (p = 0.05, with Exeter V40 Duration having the best) and cementless prostheses (p = 0.01, with Corail Pinnacle having the best). Revision rates varied according to brand among hybrids (p = 0.05, with Exeter V40 Trident having the lowest). CONCLUSIONS: Functional outcomes were better with cementless cups and revision rates were lower with cemented stems, which underlies the good overall performance of hybrids. The hybrid Exeter V40 Trident seemed to produce the best overall results. This brand should be considered as a benchmark in randomised trials.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-3762902
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2013
publisher Public Library of Science
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-37629022013-09-10 Functional Outcome, Revision Rates and Mortality after Primary Total Hip Replacement – A National Comparison of Nine Prosthesis Brands in England Pennington, Mark Grieve, Richard Black, Nick van der Meulen, Jan H. PLoS One Research Article BACKGROUND: The number of prosthesis brands used for hip replacement has increased rapidly, but there is little evidence on their effectiveness. We compared patient-reported outcomes, revision rates, and mortality for the three most frequently used brands within each prosthesis type: cemented (Exeter V40 Contemporary, Exeter V40 Duration and Exeter V40 Elite Plus Ogee), cementless (Corail Pinnacle, Accolade Trident, and Taperloc Exceed), and hybrid (Exeter V40 Trilogy, Exeter V40 Trilogy, and CPT Trilogy). METHODS AND FINDINGS: We used three national databases of patients who had hip replacements between 2008 and 2011 in the English NHS to compare functional outcome (Oxford Hip Score (OHS) ranging from 0 (worst) to 48 (best)) in 43,524 patients at six months. We analysed revisions and mortality in 187,201 patients. We used multiple regression to adjust for pre-operative differences. Prosthesis type had an impact on post-operative OHS and revision rates (both p<0.001). Patients with hybrid prostheses had the best functional outcome (mean OHS 39.4, 95%CI 39.1 to 39.7) and those with cemented prostheses the worst (37.7, 37.3 to 38.1). Patients with cemented prostheses had the lowest reported 5-year revision rates (1.3%, 1.2% to 1.4%) and those with cementless prostheses the highest (2.2%, 2.1% to 2.4%). Differences in mortality according to prosthesis type were small and not significant (p = 0.06). Functional outcome varied according to brand among cemented (p = 0.05, with Exeter V40 Duration having the best) and cementless prostheses (p = 0.01, with Corail Pinnacle having the best). Revision rates varied according to brand among hybrids (p = 0.05, with Exeter V40 Trident having the lowest). CONCLUSIONS: Functional outcomes were better with cementless cups and revision rates were lower with cemented stems, which underlies the good overall performance of hybrids. The hybrid Exeter V40 Trident seemed to produce the best overall results. This brand should be considered as a benchmark in randomised trials. Public Library of Science 2013-09-04 /pmc/articles/PMC3762902/ /pubmed/24023837 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0073228 Text en © 2013 Pennington et al http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are properly credited.
spellingShingle Research Article
Pennington, Mark
Grieve, Richard
Black, Nick
van der Meulen, Jan H.
Functional Outcome, Revision Rates and Mortality after Primary Total Hip Replacement – A National Comparison of Nine Prosthesis Brands in England
title Functional Outcome, Revision Rates and Mortality after Primary Total Hip Replacement – A National Comparison of Nine Prosthesis Brands in England
title_full Functional Outcome, Revision Rates and Mortality after Primary Total Hip Replacement – A National Comparison of Nine Prosthesis Brands in England
title_fullStr Functional Outcome, Revision Rates and Mortality after Primary Total Hip Replacement – A National Comparison of Nine Prosthesis Brands in England
title_full_unstemmed Functional Outcome, Revision Rates and Mortality after Primary Total Hip Replacement – A National Comparison of Nine Prosthesis Brands in England
title_short Functional Outcome, Revision Rates and Mortality after Primary Total Hip Replacement – A National Comparison of Nine Prosthesis Brands in England
title_sort functional outcome, revision rates and mortality after primary total hip replacement – a national comparison of nine prosthesis brands in england
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3762902/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24023837
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0073228
work_keys_str_mv AT penningtonmark functionaloutcomerevisionratesandmortalityafterprimarytotalhipreplacementanationalcomparisonofnineprosthesisbrandsinengland
AT grieverichard functionaloutcomerevisionratesandmortalityafterprimarytotalhipreplacementanationalcomparisonofnineprosthesisbrandsinengland
AT blacknick functionaloutcomerevisionratesandmortalityafterprimarytotalhipreplacementanationalcomparisonofnineprosthesisbrandsinengland
AT vandermeulenjanh functionaloutcomerevisionratesandmortalityafterprimarytotalhipreplacementanationalcomparisonofnineprosthesisbrandsinengland