header advert
Orthopaedic Proceedings Logo

Receive monthly Table of Contents alerts from Orthopaedic Proceedings

Comprehensive article alerts can be set up and managed through your account settings

View my account settings

Visit Orthopaedic Proceedings at:

Loading...

Loading...

Full Access

General Orthopaedics

PATIENT-REPORTED OUTCOMES AND MID-TERM SURVIVORSHIP OF A HYDROXYAPATITE-COATED ACETABULAR CUP WITH A DELTA CERAMIC-ON-DELTA CERAMIC BEARING COMPARED WITH OTHER CEMENTLESS CUPS

The International Society for Technology in Arthroplasty (ISTA), 29th Annual Congress, October 2016. PART 1.



Abstract

Objectives

Total hip replacement is increasingly being conducted in younger and more active patients, so surgeons often use bearing surfaces with improved wear characteristics, such as ceramic on ceramic. The primary objective of this study was to determine if survivorship for a BIOLOX® delta ceramic on delta ceramic couple used with the PROCOTYL® L acetabular cup is significantly different from all other cementless cups in a large arthroplasty registry. The secondary objective of this study was to analyze patient reported outcomes measures (PROMs) of the subject cup with a minimum five year follow-up.

Methods

Patient demographics and survivorship data was collected from the National Joint Registry of England, Wales, Northern Ireland, and the Isle of Man (NJR) database for all total hip replacements performed with the PROCOTYL® L cup used in combination with a delta-on-delta articulation, as well as for all other cementless cups. Survivorship data was compared for all revisions and cup revisions only and data was adjusted to exclude metal on metal articulations. The hazard ratio of the subject system to all cementless cups was also calculated with the Cox Proportional Hazards model. Patients with the subject components implanted for a minimum of five years completed Oxford Hip, EQ-5D, and EQ VAS score questionnaires.

Results

The patient demographic data collected for the subject components and all cementless cups is provided in Figure 1. Six-year survivorship for the subject cup (98.6%) was similar to survivorship for all cementless cup revisions in the NJR database (98.5%), as seen in Figure 2. When the cup alone was revised, six-year survivorship of the subject cup (98.6%) and all NJR cementless cups (98.5%) was also similar. However, the subject cup survivorship remained at 98.6% from 4 to 6 years post-implantation, while survivorship for all cementless cups decreased slightly from years 4 to 6. The similarities between the revision risk of the subject system and all cementless cups in the NJR can be seen in the Cox Proportional Hazards model for revision risk ratios provided in Figure 3. Patients with the subject cup implanted for an average of 5.88 years reported Oxford Hip, EQ-5D, and EQ VAS scores of 39.60 ± 10.78, 0.801 ± 0.259, and 75.49 ± 19.25, respectively.

Conclusions

The subject acetabular cup with a ceramic on ceramic articulation exhibited similar survivorship to all other cementless acetabular cups, excluding those with metal on metal bearings, in the NJR. Patients implanted with the subject system for an average of 5.88 years reported what are considered satisfactory Oxford Hip, EQ-5D, and EQ VAS scores. This survivorship and PROMs data is the first report of mid-term outcomes with the subject components.


*Email: