Cargando…
Assessing the non-inferiority of prosthesis constructs used in total and unicondylar knee replacements using data from the National Joint Registry of England, Wales, Northern Ireland and the Isle of Man: a benchmarking study
OBJECTIVES: To investigate the relative performance of knee replacement constructs compared with the best performing construct and illustrate the substantial variability in performance. DESIGN: A non-inferiority study. SETTING: England and Wales. PARTICIPANTS: All primary total and unicondylar knee...
Autores principales: | , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BMJ Publishing Group
2019
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6502008/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31036709 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2018-026736 |
_version_ | 1783416184765415424 |
---|---|
author | Deere, Kevin C Whitehouse, Michael R Porter, Martyn Blom, Ashley W Sayers, Adrian |
author_facet | Deere, Kevin C Whitehouse, Michael R Porter, Martyn Blom, Ashley W Sayers, Adrian |
author_sort | Deere, Kevin C |
collection | PubMed |
description | OBJECTIVES: To investigate the relative performance of knee replacement constructs compared with the best performing construct and illustrate the substantial variability in performance. DESIGN: A non-inferiority study. SETTING: England and Wales. PARTICIPANTS: All primary total and unicondylar knee replacements performed and registered in the National Joint Registry between 1 April 2003 and 31 December 2016. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Kaplan-Meier failure function for knee replacement constructs. Failure difference between best performing construct (the benchmark) and other constructs. METHODS: Using a non-inferiority analysis, the performance of knee replacement constructs by brand were compared with the best performing construct. Construct failure was estimated using the 1-Kaplan Meier method, that is, an estimate of net failure. The difference in failure between the contemporary benchmark construct and all other constructs were tested. RESULTS: Of the 449 different knee replacement constructs used, only 27 had ≥500 procedures at risk at 10 years postprimary, 18 of which were classified as inferior to the benchmark by at least 20% relative risk of failure. Two of these 18 were unicondylar constructs that were inferior by at least 100% relative risk. In men, aged 55–75 years, 12 of 27 (44%) constructs were inferior by at least 20% to the benchmark at 7 years postprimary. In women, aged 55–75 years, 8 of 32 (25%) constructs were inferior at 7 years postprimary. Very few constructs were classified as non-inferior to the contemporary benchmark. CONCLUSIONS: There are few knee replacement constructs that can be shown to be non-inferior to a contemporary benchmark. Unicondylar knee constructs have, almost universally, at least 100% worse revision outcomes compared with the best performing total knee replacement. These results will help to inform patients, clinicians and commissioners when considering knee replacement surgery. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-6502008 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2019 |
publisher | BMJ Publishing Group |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-65020082019-05-21 Assessing the non-inferiority of prosthesis constructs used in total and unicondylar knee replacements using data from the National Joint Registry of England, Wales, Northern Ireland and the Isle of Man: a benchmarking study Deere, Kevin C Whitehouse, Michael R Porter, Martyn Blom, Ashley W Sayers, Adrian BMJ Open Surgery OBJECTIVES: To investigate the relative performance of knee replacement constructs compared with the best performing construct and illustrate the substantial variability in performance. DESIGN: A non-inferiority study. SETTING: England and Wales. PARTICIPANTS: All primary total and unicondylar knee replacements performed and registered in the National Joint Registry between 1 April 2003 and 31 December 2016. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Kaplan-Meier failure function for knee replacement constructs. Failure difference between best performing construct (the benchmark) and other constructs. METHODS: Using a non-inferiority analysis, the performance of knee replacement constructs by brand were compared with the best performing construct. Construct failure was estimated using the 1-Kaplan Meier method, that is, an estimate of net failure. The difference in failure between the contemporary benchmark construct and all other constructs were tested. RESULTS: Of the 449 different knee replacement constructs used, only 27 had ≥500 procedures at risk at 10 years postprimary, 18 of which were classified as inferior to the benchmark by at least 20% relative risk of failure. Two of these 18 were unicondylar constructs that were inferior by at least 100% relative risk. In men, aged 55–75 years, 12 of 27 (44%) constructs were inferior by at least 20% to the benchmark at 7 years postprimary. In women, aged 55–75 years, 8 of 32 (25%) constructs were inferior at 7 years postprimary. Very few constructs were classified as non-inferior to the contemporary benchmark. CONCLUSIONS: There are few knee replacement constructs that can be shown to be non-inferior to a contemporary benchmark. Unicondylar knee constructs have, almost universally, at least 100% worse revision outcomes compared with the best performing total knee replacement. These results will help to inform patients, clinicians and commissioners when considering knee replacement surgery. BMJ Publishing Group 2019-04-29 /pmc/articles/PMC6502008/ /pubmed/31036709 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2018-026736 Text en © Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2019. Re-use permitted under CC BY. Published by BMJ. This is an open access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 Unported (CC BY 4.0) license, which permits others to copy, redistribute, remix, transform and build upon this work for any purpose, provided the original work is properly cited, a link to the licence is given, and indication of whether changes were made. See: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. |
spellingShingle | Surgery Deere, Kevin C Whitehouse, Michael R Porter, Martyn Blom, Ashley W Sayers, Adrian Assessing the non-inferiority of prosthesis constructs used in total and unicondylar knee replacements using data from the National Joint Registry of England, Wales, Northern Ireland and the Isle of Man: a benchmarking study |
title | Assessing the non-inferiority of prosthesis constructs used in total and unicondylar knee replacements using data from the National Joint Registry of England, Wales, Northern Ireland and the Isle of Man: a benchmarking study |
title_full | Assessing the non-inferiority of prosthesis constructs used in total and unicondylar knee replacements using data from the National Joint Registry of England, Wales, Northern Ireland and the Isle of Man: a benchmarking study |
title_fullStr | Assessing the non-inferiority of prosthesis constructs used in total and unicondylar knee replacements using data from the National Joint Registry of England, Wales, Northern Ireland and the Isle of Man: a benchmarking study |
title_full_unstemmed | Assessing the non-inferiority of prosthesis constructs used in total and unicondylar knee replacements using data from the National Joint Registry of England, Wales, Northern Ireland and the Isle of Man: a benchmarking study |
title_short | Assessing the non-inferiority of prosthesis constructs used in total and unicondylar knee replacements using data from the National Joint Registry of England, Wales, Northern Ireland and the Isle of Man: a benchmarking study |
title_sort | assessing the non-inferiority of prosthesis constructs used in total and unicondylar knee replacements using data from the national joint registry of england, wales, northern ireland and the isle of man: a benchmarking study |
topic | Surgery |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6502008/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31036709 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2018-026736 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT deerekevinc assessingthenoninferiorityofprosthesisconstructsusedintotalandunicondylarkneereplacementsusingdatafromthenationaljointregistryofenglandwalesnorthernirelandandtheisleofmanabenchmarkingstudy AT whitehousemichaelr assessingthenoninferiorityofprosthesisconstructsusedintotalandunicondylarkneereplacementsusingdatafromthenationaljointregistryofenglandwalesnorthernirelandandtheisleofmanabenchmarkingstudy AT portermartyn assessingthenoninferiorityofprosthesisconstructsusedintotalandunicondylarkneereplacementsusingdatafromthenationaljointregistryofenglandwalesnorthernirelandandtheisleofmanabenchmarkingstudy AT blomashleyw assessingthenoninferiorityofprosthesisconstructsusedintotalandunicondylarkneereplacementsusingdatafromthenationaljointregistryofenglandwalesnorthernirelandandtheisleofmanabenchmarkingstudy AT sayersadrian assessingthenoninferiorityofprosthesisconstructsusedintotalandunicondylarkneereplacementsusingdatafromthenationaljointregistryofenglandwalesnorthernirelandandtheisleofmanabenchmarkingstudy |