Search

Background: The number of people eighty years of age and older in developed countries is increasing, with a concomitant increased demand for total hip replacement. We analyzed the outcomes of total hip arthroplasty for patients in this age group using data from the Finnish National Arthroplasty Registry., Methods: Data from the Finnish Arthroplasty Registry on 6540 patients (6989 hips) who were eighty years of age or older at the time of a total hip arthroplasty, performed between 1980 and 2004, were evaluated with use of survival analyses. Factors affecting survivorship rates were sought, and the reasons for revision were identified., Results: The mean age of the patients undergoing a primary total hip arthroplasty was 82.7 years. The mean longevity of 3065 patients who died following total hip arthroplasty was 5.1 years. With revision total hip arthroplasty for any reason as the end point, Kaplan Meier survivorship was 97% (95% confidence interval, 96% to 97%) at five years (2617 hips) and 94% (95% confidence interval, 93% to 95%) at ten years (532 hips). Of the 195 hip replacements that required revision, 183 had information on the reason for revision. Eighty-four (46%) were revised for aseptic loosening; thirty-six (20%), for recurrent dislocation; twenty-four (13%), for a periprosthetic fracture; and twenty-three (13%), for infection. Seven hundred and twenty-nine patients had undergone hybrid fixation (a cemented stem and a cementless cup). The survivorship of these replacements was significantly better than that for replacements with cementless fixation in 399 patients (p < 0.05)., Conclusions: In patients who had a total hip arthroplasty when they were more than eighty years old, the prevalence of aseptic loosening was less than that encountered in younger patients, but recurrent dislocation, periprosthetic fracture, and infection were more common in this age group. Cementation of the femoral stem demonstrated better long-term results than cementless fixation, indicating that it may provide better initial fixation and, therefore, longer life-in-service.

Background: National and regional arthroplasty registries have been used to study the results of primary total knee arthroplasties. The purpose of this paper was to present the results of revision total knee replacements and describe predictors of survival of those replacements, with repeat revision as the end point., Methods: The nationwide Finnish Arthroplasty Registry included 2637 revision total knee arthroplasties from 1990 through 2002. Survivorship of the revision total knee arthroplasties was analyzed, with repeat revision as the end point. The survivorship analyses comprised evaluations of the proportional hazards assumption followed by calculations of univariate and multivariate statistics and model diagnostics as appropriate., Results: The survival rate following the revision total knee arthroplasties was 95% (95% confidence interval, 94% to 96%) at two years (1874 knees), 89% (95% confidence interval, 88% to 90%) at five years (944 knees), and 79% (95% confidence interval, 78% to 81%) at ten years (141 knees). Multivariate regression analysis showed the most significant predictors of prosthetic survival to be the age of the patient and the life in service of the primary total knee replacement (that is, the time between the primary total knee replacement and the revision). Survivorship was also significantly predicted by the year of the first revision total knee arthroplasty and the reason for the revision., Conclusions: An age greater than seventy years, revision five years or more after the primary arthroplasty, and absence of patellar subluxation are positive indicators of survival of a revision total knee replacement. We believe that normal aging as well as the deconditioning effect of disease (osteoarthritis and rheumatoid arthritis) and its treatment (primary total knee replacement) may lead to a reduced activity level, which, together with a presumed reluctance to operate on elderly patients, protects against repeat revisions., Level of Evidence: Prognostic Level II. See Instructions to Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.