Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research: December 2013 - Volume 471 - Issue 12 - p 3863–3869 doi: 10.1007/s11999-013-2935-5 Symposium: 2012 International Hip Society Proceedings

What Are the Causes for Failures of Primary Hip Arthroplasties in France?

Delaunay, Christian, MD1, a; Hamadouche, Moussa, MD, PhD2; Girard, Julien, MD3; Duhamel, Alain, PhD4The SoFCOT Group
Hip

Background There are no large database cohorts describing the causes for failure of primary THAs in France. Because implants and causes for revision vary between national registers, it is important to obtain data from all countries.

 

Questions/purposes We therefore determined (1) the mechanisms of failure of primary THAs, (2) their order of appearance with time, (3) the types of surgical techniques and implant designs used to perform revision THAs, and (4) 90-day complications after revision THA in France.

 

Methods We prospectively collected data on all 2107 first-time revision THAs from 30 tertiary centers from January 1, 2010, to December 31, 2011. A dual-mobility liner had been used in 251 hips. Mean time from primary procedure to revision THA was 11.2 years (range, 1 day to 42 years). Mean age at revision was 70 years (range, 17-104 years).

 

Results The causes for revision were mechanical loosening (42%), periprosthetic fracture (12%), infection (11%), wear/osteolysis (11%), dislocation (10%), surgical technique error (6%), and implant fracture (3%). The most common type of revision procedure was all-component revision (49%). A dual-mobility liner was used in 1184 hips (62%). The 90-day dislocation rate was less than 4%, and mortality rate was 1.6%.

 

Conclusions Contrary to other reported data, we found dislocation was not the main cause for failure of primary THAs but was still the more frequent early complication after revision. These findings might be related to the use of dual-mobility sockets in more than 10% of primary THAs and more than 60% of revision THAs.

 

Level of Evidence Level IV, therapeutic study. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.


Download article