Not all cemented hips are the same: a register-based (NJR) comparison of taper-slip and composite beam femoral stems. (4th May 2019)
- Record Type:
- Journal Article
- Title:
- Not all cemented hips are the same: a register-based (NJR) comparison of taper-slip and composite beam femoral stems. (4th May 2019)
- Main Title:
- Not all cemented hips are the same: a register-based (NJR) comparison of taper-slip and composite beam femoral stems
- Authors:
- Kazi, Hussain A
Whitehouse, Sarah L
Howell, Jonathan R
Timperley, A John - Abstract:
- Abstract : Background and purpose — No difference in outcome has been demonstrated comparing cemented taper-slip and composite beam designs in short-term randomised trials; we assessed outcome differences using a registry analysis. Patients and methods — All cemented stems with > 100 implantations were identified in the National Joint Registry of England and Wales from April 1, 2003 to September 31, 2013 and categorised as taper-slip or composite beam. Survival analyses using Kaplan–Meier and Cox regression were performed. Results — We identified 292, 987 cemented arthroplasties, of which 16% (47, 586) were composite beam stems, with taper-slip stems making up the remainder (n = 245, 401). There was a statistically significant increased chance of revision in the composite beam group compared with the taper-slip group (1.7% vs 1.3%, p < 0.001) but statistically no significant differences of survival estimates (p = 0.06). When the 2 groups were segregated to delineate the most implanted model in each category, the differences became more profound with the most implanted taper-slip stem (Exeter V40) showing statistically and clinically significant superior 8-year survival: 97.9% compared with 97.6% for all other taper-slip; 97.5% for the most implanted composite beam (Charnley cemented stem); and 97.7% for all other composite beam. Interpretation — There was an increased incidence of revision for composite beam stems. The most implanted taper-slip stem demonstrated significantAbstract : Background and purpose — No difference in outcome has been demonstrated comparing cemented taper-slip and composite beam designs in short-term randomised trials; we assessed outcome differences using a registry analysis. Patients and methods — All cemented stems with > 100 implantations were identified in the National Joint Registry of England and Wales from April 1, 2003 to September 31, 2013 and categorised as taper-slip or composite beam. Survival analyses using Kaplan–Meier and Cox regression were performed. Results — We identified 292, 987 cemented arthroplasties, of which 16% (47, 586) were composite beam stems, with taper-slip stems making up the remainder (n = 245, 401). There was a statistically significant increased chance of revision in the composite beam group compared with the taper-slip group (1.7% vs 1.3%, p < 0.001) but statistically no significant differences of survival estimates (p = 0.06). When the 2 groups were segregated to delineate the most implanted model in each category, the differences became more profound with the most implanted taper-slip stem (Exeter V40) showing statistically and clinically significant superior 8-year survival: 97.9% compared with 97.6% for all other taper-slip; 97.5% for the most implanted composite beam (Charnley cemented stem); and 97.7% for all other composite beam. Interpretation — There was an increased incidence of revision for composite beam stems. The most implanted taper-slip stem demonstrated significant survival advantage vs. all other stems. … (more)
- Is Part Of:
- Acta orthopaedica. Volume 90:Number 3(2019)
- Journal:
- Acta orthopaedica
- Issue:
- Volume 90:Number 3(2019)
- Issue Display:
- Volume 90, Issue 3 (2019)
- Year:
- 2019
- Volume:
- 90
- Issue:
- 3
- Issue Sort Value:
- 2019-0090-0003-0000
- Page Start:
- 214
- Page End:
- 219
- Publication Date:
- 2019-05-04
- Subjects:
- Orthopedics -- Periodicals
616.7005 - Journal URLs:
- http://informahealthcare.com/loi/ort ↗
http://www.tandfonline.com/toc/iort20/current ↗
https://actaorthop.org/actao/index ↗
http://www.tandfonline.com/ ↗
http://journalsonline.tandf.co.uk/app/home/journal.asp?wasp=65168817ff044fea9c5b577f1cfe2186&referrer=parent&backto=linkingpublicationresults, 1:113260, 1 ↗ - DOI:
- 10.1080/17453674.2019.1582680 ↗
- Languages:
- English
- ISSNs:
- 1745-3674
- Deposit Type:
- Legaldeposit
- View Content:
- Available online (eLD content is only available in our Reading Rooms) ↗
- Physical Locations:
- British Library DSC - 0642.055000
British Library DSC - BLDSS-3PM
British Library HMNTS - ELD Digital store - Ingest File:
- 17153.xml