The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery; July 1, 2020; 102 (13): 1177

Implant Survival of 6,080 Tritanium Cups in Primary Total Hip Arthroplasty

Palomäki Antton, MD; Hemmilä Matias, MD; Laaksonen Inari, MD, PhD; Matilainen Markus, PhD; Eskelinen Antti, MD, PhD; Haapakoski Jaason, PhD; Puhto Ari-pekka, MD, PhD; Kettunen Jukka, MD, PhD; Manninen Mikko, MD, PhD; Mäkelä Keijo T., MD, PhD

Hip

Background: To enhance osseointegration in total hip arthroplasty (THA), ultraporous or highly porous-coated cups were introduced. Implant survival data on these new devices have been scarce. The aim of our study was to assess the survivorship of ultraporous Tritanium cups (Stryker) in a population-based register study.

Methods: In this study, we collected data on 6,080 primary THAs using a Tritanium cup and 25,670 THAs using a conventional cup (control group) from the Finnish Arthroplasty Register; these procedures were performed from January 1, 2009, to December 31, 2017. We calculated the Kaplan-Meier survival estimates with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). The end point was revision for any reason or for aseptic loosening of the cup. The revision risks were assessed with use of the Cox multiple regression model. The variables assessed in the Cox model were femoral head size, age group, involved side, operation year, sex, diagnosis, and fixation of the stem. The proportional hazards assumption of the Cox model was not fulfilled, so the follow-up time was divided into 3 time periods: 0 to 2 years, >2 to 4 years, and >4 years.

Results: When comparing the 2 groups with regard to revision for any reason, the 5-year Kaplan-Meier survivorship of the Tritanium group (94.7% [95% CI, 94.0% to 95.4%]) was inferior to that of the control group (96.0% [95% CI, 95.7% to 96.3%]). In the Cox regression analysis of the 2 groups for the time period of >4 years, the Tritanium group had an increased risk of revision for any reason compared with the control group (hazard ratio [HR], 3.12 [95% CI, 1.82 to 5.35]; p < 0.001). With regard to revision for aseptic loosening of the cup, the Tritanium group had an increased risk of revision compared with the control group for both 0 to 2 years (HR, 3.80 [95% CI, 1.76 to 8.24]; p < 0.001) and >2 to 4 years (HR, 11.2 [95% CI, 3.28 to 38.0]; p < 0.001).

Conclusions: There was no advantage to using the ultraporous-coated Tritanium cup for primary THA compared with conventional uncemented cups. However, wide CIs for some HR estimates may point to a lack of precision. Therefore, further research on subject is needed.

Level of Evidence: Therapeutic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Link to article