For this retrospective cohort study, patients aged ≤ 30 years
(very young) who underwent total hip arthroplasty (THA) were compared
with patients aged ≥ 60 years (elderly) to evaluate the rate of
revision arthroplasty, implant survival, the indications for revision,
the complications, and the patient-reported outcomes. We retrospectively reviewed all patients who underwent primary
THA between January 2000 and May 2015 from our institutional database.
A total of 145 very young and 1359 elderly patients were reviewed.
The mean follow-up was 5.3 years (1 to 18). Logistic generalized
estimating equations were used to compare characteristics and the revision
rate. Survival was evaluated using Kaplan–Meier curves and hazard
rates were created using Cox regression.Aims
Patients and Methods
Total hip arthroplasty (THA) in the young patient has been associated with higher rates of revision and perioperative complications. For clinicians and patients alike, there remains a desire to better characterize the durability of THA in young patients. We reviewed secondary data from our institutional database for all patients who underwent primary THA from January 2000 to May 2015. Patients were identified using ICD-9 procedure code 81.51. Our primary interest was the survival of implants in patients 30 years of age or younger (n=167) while using a contemporaneous cohort of patients age 60 and older as a control (n=1359). Failure was defined as revision THA for any reason. Cox regression with robust standard errors was used to calculate hazard ratios. A population-averaged Poisson regression analysis was used to compare complication rates. The rate of all-cause revision THA was 2.4 times greater (95% CI 1.10 – 5.37, p=0.028) in young patients (7%, 12/167) undergoing primary or conversion to THA compared to their elderly counterparts (3.7%, 50/1,359). Survival at 10 years was 89% (95% CI 82 – 94) in the young cohort and 96% (94 – 97) in the elderly cohort. The primary reasons for revision in young that patients compared to their elderly counterparts included metal-on-metal implants (IRR 8.12, 95% CI 2.04 – 32.38, p=0.003). These data demonstrate that patients 30 years of age and younger substantially benefit from THA but should be warned of higher risk of subsequent revision.
