Identifying risk factors associated with complications after revision hip arthroplasty using the register of the Department of Orthopedics
Abstract
Hip revision surgeries have become crucial points of modern orthopedic surgical activity. Patients usually
have relatively higher age and more comorbidities compared to those having a primary hip replacement.
Additional, the special anatomical situation and the presence of bone loss are also affecting the outcome
of the surgeries. Using the Revision Hip Arthroplasty Register of the Department of Orthopedics at
Semmelweis University, we collected and identified prognostic factors that show a significant connection
with complications in the early postoperative period. Age, sex, preoperative lab parameters and previous
hip surgeries all affect the outcome of hip revision surgeries. Old age, hypertonia and preoperative anemia
is predispose to postoperative intensive care unit admission. A high number of patients with periprosthetic
fractures or having the need of stem revisions are also placed in the ICU following the hip revision. Male
sex, early re-revision and septic loosening are risk factors for postoperative DAIR procedure. Previous hip
surgeries are associated with dislocation. If we improve the adjustable risk factors and identify the others,
we can significantly reduce the number of complications in the early postoperative period.
References
Amin RM, Raad M, Rao SS, Guilbault R, Best MJ, Amanatullah DF. Preoperative hypoalbuminemia is associated with early morbidity and mortality after revision total hip arthroplasty. Orthopedics, 2002. 45(5): 281-286. https://doi.org/10.3928/01477447-20220511-02
Boddapati V, Fu MC, Tetreault MW, Blevins JL, Richardson SS, Su EP. Short-term complications after revision hip arthroplasty for prosthetic joint infection are increased relative to noninfectious revisions. J Arthroplasty, 2018. 33(9): 2997-3002. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arth.2018.05.001
Briguglio M, Wainwright TW. Nutritional and physical prehabilitation in elective orthopedic surgery: Rationale and proposal for implementation. Ther Clin Risk Manag. 2022. Jan 6; 18:21-30. https://doi.org/10.2147/TCRM.S341953
Choong AL, Shadbolt C, Choong E, Spelman T, Muñoz-Mahamud E, Lora-Tamayo J, Kim K, Wouthuyzen-Bakker M, Spangehl M, Chayakulkeeree M, Young SW, Choong PFM, Dowsey MM. The impact of sex on the outcomes of prosthetic joint infection treatment with debridement, antibiotics and implant retention: A systematic review and individual patient data meta-analysis. J Am Acad Orthop Surg Glob Res Rev. 2022. 6(11): e22.00102. https://doi.org/10.5435/JAAOSGlobal-D-22-00102
Deere K, Whitehouse MR, Kunutsor SK, Sayers A, Mason J, Blom AW. How long do revised and multiply revised hip replacements last? A retrospective observational study of the National Joint Registry. Lancet Rheumatol. 2022. 4(7): e468-e479. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2665-9913(22)00097-2
Evans JT, Evans JP, Walker RW, Blom AW, Whitehouse MR, Sayers A. How long does a hip replacement last? A systematic review and meta-analysis of case series and national registry reports with more than 15 years of follow-up. Lancet. 2019. 393(10172): 647-654. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(18)31665-9
Goh GS, Shohat N, Abdelaal MS, Small I, Thomas T, Ciesielka K-A, Parvizi J. Serum glucose variability increases the risk of complications following aseptic revision hip and knee arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2022. 104(18): 1614-1620. https://doi.org/10.2106/JBJS.21.00878
Innocenti M, Smulders K, Willems JH, Goosen JHM, van Hellemondt G. Patient-reported outcome measures, complication rates, and re-revision rates are not associated with the indication for revision total hip arthroplasty: a prospective evaluation of 647 consecutive patients Bone Joint J. 2022. 104-B(7): 859-866. https://doi.org/10.1302/0301-620X.104B7.BJJ-2021-1739.R1
Kenney C, Dick S, Lea J, Liu J, Ebraheim NA. A systematic review of the causes of failure of Revision Total Hip Arthroplasty. J Orthop. 2019. 16(5):93-395. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jor.2019.04.011
Kuijpers MFL, Hannink G, van Steenbergen LN, Schreurs BW. Outcome of revision hip arthroplasty in patients younger than 55 years: an analysis of 1,037 revisions in the Dutch Arthroplasty Register. Acta Orthop. 2020. 91(2): 165-170. https://doi.org/10.1080/17453674.2019.1708655
Pflüger MJ, Frömel DE, Meurer A. Total hip arthroplasty revision surgery: Impact of morbidity on perioperative outcomes. J Arthroplasty. 2021. 36(2): 676-681. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arth.2020.08.005
Prodinger PM, Schauwecker J, Mühlhofer H, Harrasser N, Pohlig F, Suren C, von Eisenhart-Rothe R. 2017). Luxation nach Hüfttotalendoprothesenrevision. Orthopäde, 2017. 46(2): 133-141. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00132-016-3377-z
Szuper K, Horváth G, Bellyei Á, Than P. Cement nélküli implantátummal végzett csípőrevíziók eredményei különös tekintettel a heterotop csontképződésre. Magyar Traumatológia Ortopédia Kézsebészet Plasztikai Sebészet, 2009. 52(1): 37-44.
Traven SA, Reeves RA, Slone HS, Walton ZJ. Frailty predicts medical complications, length of stay, readmission, and mortality in revision hip and knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty. 2019. 34(7): 1412-1416. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arth.2019.02.060
Udvarhelyi I, Kállay T, Szily T, Mátyás V, Abonyi B, Hangody L: Csípőprotézis revíziókról – 1065 eset alapján, Magyar Traumatológia Ortopédia Kézsebészet Plasztikai Sebészet, 2018. 61. (Suppl). 47-56. https://doi.org/10.21755/MTO.2018.061.S00l.005
