Hip and Knee Arthroplasty - Surface Hippy Guide to Hip Resurfacing

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Table KP23: Yearly Cumulative Percent Revision of Primary Unicompartmental Knee Replacement CPR 1 Yr 2 Yrs 3 Yrs 5 Yrs 7 Yrs AMC 4.7 (3.0, 7.3) 8.6 (6.1, 12.1) 11.8 (8.5, 16.2) Advance 11.8 (4.6, 28.4) 20.9 (10.5, 38.9) 27.5 (15.3, 46.3) Allegretto Uni 2.9 (2.2, 3.9) 4.8 (3.9, 6.0) 5.6 (4.5, 6.9) 8.3 (6.9, 10.0) 11.8 (9.0, 15.4) BalanSys 5.4 (3.4, 8.7) 8.8 (5.8, 13.1) 8.8 (5.8, 13.1) Eius 4.2 (1.8, 9.7) 6.0 (2.9, 12.2) 8.5 (4.5, 15.9) 13.7 (7.1, 25.4) Endo-Model Sled 1.4 (0.8, 2.6) 3.3 (2.2, 5.0) 4.8 (3.3, 7.0) Freedom PKR/Active 1.3 (0.6, 2.6) 3.0 (1.7, 5.2) GRU 1.4 (0.9, 2.2) 3.6 (2.6, 4.8) 5.1 (3.9, 6.6) 7.5 (5.6, 10.1) Genesis 2.7 (2.0, 3.6) 5.6 (4.5, 7.0) 8.2 (6.8, 9.9) 11.0 (9.0, 13.3) HLS Uni Evolution 4.4 (1.0, 17.6) 4.4 (1.0, 17.6) 4.4 (1.0, 17.6) LCS 12.0 (4.0, 32.7) 12.0 (4.0, 32.7) 12.0 (4.0, 32.7) 16.0 (6.3, 37.2) 20.4 (9.0, 42.4) M/G 1.5 (1.0, 2.2) 3.1 (2.4, 4.0) 4.2 (3.4, 5.3) 6.8 (5.5, 8.4) 8.1 (6.4, 10.3) Natural Knee 5.6 (2.8, 10.9) 10.5 (6.5, 16.9) 12.0 (7.6, 18.5) 12.0 (7.6, 18.5) 14.0 (8.7, 22.0) Oxford 3 2.3 (2.0, 2.7) 4.6 (4.2, 5.1) 6.3 (5.8, 6.9) 8.9 (8.2, 9.7) 11.5 (10.3, 12.9) PFC Sigma 2.2 (0.7, 6.6) 5.8 (3.0, 11.3) 6.6 (3.5, 12.2) 8.1 (4.6, 14.1) 12.3 (7.0, 21.3) Preservation-Fixed 2.6 (2.0, 3.5) 5.8 (4.7, 7.0) 7.3 (6.1, 8.7) 9.3 (7.8, 11.1) Preservation-Mobile 5.3 (3.5, 8.1) 9.8 (7.3, 13.3) 15.2 (11.9, 19.3) 19.4 (15.5, 24.1) Repicci 1.3 (0.9, 1.8) 2.5 (1.9, 3.3) 4.0 (3.2, 4.9) 6.9 (5.7, 8.2) UC-Plus 0 0 2.3 (0.3, 15.4) 7.2 (2.4, 20.8) Unix 1.9 (1.3, 2.6) 4.0 (3.1, 5.1) 5.5 (4.4, 6.8) 7.0 (5.6, 8.7) ZUK 1.4 (0.7, 3.0) 1.4 (0.7, 3.0) Note: Cumulative Percent Revision equal to zero indicates that the prosthesis has been followed up to this time with no revisions recorded. 132
Primary Patella/Trochlear Knee Replacement Prostheses with a higher than anticipated Revision Rate Table KP24: Individual Primary Patella/Trochlear Knee Prostheses identified as having a higher than anticipated Revision Rate Resurfacing Trochlear Component Newly Identified Total Number Observed Component Years Revisions per 100 Observed Component Years Hazard Ratio P Value HR 95% CI LCS 338 803 4.98 2.054 0.0008 (1.35, 3.13) Note: LCS have been compared to all other Resurfacing Trochlear components. Table KP25: Yearly Cumulative Percent Revision of Individual Primary Patella/Trochlear Knee Prostheses identified as having a higher than anticipated Revision Rate Newly Identified CPR 1 Yr 2 Yrs 3 Yrs 5 Yrs 7 Yrs LCS 3.3 (1.8, 6.1) 8.0 (5.2, 12.0) 14.7 (10.5, 20.5) 23.0 (16.8, 31.1) Table KP26: Yearly Usage of Individual Primary Patella/Trochlear Knee Prostheses identified as having a higher than anticipated Revision Rate Year of Implant 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 Newly Identified LCS 0 0 0 26 56 68 47 64 77 Figure KP10: Cumulative Percent Revision of Individual Primary Patella/Trochlear Knee Prostheses identified as having a higher than anticipated Revision Rate Newly Identified 133
Page 1 and 2:
Hip and Knee Arthroplasty ANNUAL RE
Page 3:
Australian Orthopaedic Association
Page 6 and 7:
PRIMARY PARTIAL KNEE REPLACEMENT...
Page 8 and 9:
PRIMARY TOTAL HIP REPLACEMENT......
Page 10 and 11:
PRIMARY TOTAL KNEE REPLACEMENT ....
Page 12 and 13:
viii
Page 14 and 15:
RIMARY TOTAL RESURFACING HIP REPLAC
Page 17 and 18:
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This executive su
Page 19 and 20:
INTRODUCTION This is the eighth Ann
Page 21 and 22:
supply aggregate data and negotiati
Page 23 and 24:
PARTICIPATING HOSPITALS & COORDINAT
Page 25 and 26:
VICTORIA PUBLIC HOSPITALS Austin He
Page 27 and 28:
QUEENSLAND PUBLIC HOSPITALS Bundabe
Page 29 and 30:
WESTERN AUSTRALIA PUBLIC HOSPITALS
Page 31 and 32:
HIP REPLACEMENT GENERAL INTRODUCTIO
Page 33 and 34:
difference is also evident when com
Page 35 and 36:
Table HG2: Number of Hip Replacemen
Page 37 and 38:
Table HG4: Primary Hip Replacement
Page 39 and 40:
Table HG8: Primary Total Resurfacin
Page 41 and 42:
The use of monoblock prostheses in
Page 43 and 44:
PRIMARY PARTIAL HIP REPLACEMENT 1/9
Page 45 and 46:
Table HP2: 10 Most Common Unipolar
Page 47 and 48:
Table HP4: 10 Most Common Bipolar H
Page 49 and 50:
Table HP6: Primary Partial Hip Repl
Page 51 and 52:
Table HP14: Primary Partial Hip Rep
Page 53 and 54:
Table HP15: Primary Unipolar Monobl
Page 55 and 56:
Table HP19: Primary Bipolar Hip Rep
Page 57 and 58:
Table HP24: Primary Unipolar Monobl
Page 59 and 60:
Page 61 and 62:
Table HP32: Primary Unipolar Modula
Page 63 and 64:
Page 65 and 66:
Primary Unipolar Modular Hip Replac
Page 67 and 68:
Primary Bipolar Hip Replacement Pro
Page 69 and 70:
PRIMARY TOTAL HIP REPLACEMENT The a
Page 71 and 72:
Effect of Bearing Surface For the f
Page 73 and 74:
since 2004. The three total resurfa
Page 75 and 76:
combination has been used in 1,649
Page 77 and 78:
Table HT2: Primary Conventional Tot
Page 79 and 80:
Table HT6: 10 Most Common Femoral C
Page 81 and 82:
Table HT8: 10 Most Common Femoral C
Page 83 and 84:
Table HT10: 10 Most Common Acetabul
Page 85 and 86:
Table HT12: 10 Most Common Primary
Page 87 and 88:
Primary Conventional Total Hip Repl
Page 89 and 90:
Table HT19: Primary Conventional To
Page 91 and 92:
Page 93 and 94:
Figure HT18: Cumulative Percent Rev
Page 95 and 96:
Page 97 and 98: Figure HT23: Cumulative Percent Rev
Page 99 and 100: Figure HT26: Cumulative Percent Rev
Page 101 and 102: Table HT31: Primary Conventional To
Page 103 and 104: Table HT33: Primary Conventional To
Page 105 and 106: Primary Total Resurfacing Hip Repla
Page 107 and 108: Table HT39: Primary Total Resurfaci
Page 113 and 114: Table HT48: Yearly Cumulative Perce
Page 115 and 116: Figure HT34-43: Cumulative Percent
Page 117 and 118: Primary Total Resurfacing Hip Repla
Page 119 and 120: REVISION HIP REPLACEMENT This repor
Page 121 and 122: REVISION HIP REPLACEMENT 1/9/1999 -
Page 123 and 124: ‘Revision of Known Primary’ Hip
Page 125 and 126: Table HR10: Outcomes of ‘Revision
Page 127 and 128: knee increased from 29.4% in 2003 t
Page 129 and 130: Table KG2: Number of Knee Replaceme
Page 131 and 132: Table KG4: Primary Knee Replacement
Page 133 and 134: PRIMARY PARTIAL KNEE REPLACEMENT Th
Page 135 and 136: Effect of Age and Gender The risk o
Page 137 and 138: Primary Partial Resurfacing Knee Re
Page 139 and 140: Table KP6: Primary Patella/Trochlea
Page 141 and 142: Table KP12: Primary Unicompartmenta
Page 147: Table KP22: Primary Unicompartmenta
Page 151 and 152: Figure KP11-14: Cumulative Percent
Page 153 and 154: decrease in use and now accounts fo
Page 155 and 156: as having a higher than anticipated
Page 157 and 158: Table KT2: 10 Most Common Femoral C
Page 159 and 160: Table KT4: 10 Most Common Femoral C
Page 161 and 162: Figure KT5: Trends in Prosthesis Fi
Page 163 and 164: Table KT10: Primary Total Knee Repl
Page 165 and 166: Figure KT10: Primary Total Knee Rep
Page 171 and 172: Table KT23: Yearly Cumulative Perce
Page 177 and 178: Table KT30: Primary Unicompartmenta
Page 183 and 184: Figure KT24-KT33: Cumulative Percen
Page 185 and 186: REVISION KNEE REPLACEMENT This repo
Page 187 and 188: p
Page 189 and 190: Figure KR1: Trends in Usage for Rev
Page 191 and 192: ‘Revision of Known Primary’ Kne
Page 193 and 194: Table KR10: Outcome of ‘Revision
Page 195 and 196: Table KR14: Outcome of ‘Revision
Page 197 and 198: CEMENT IN HIP AND KNEE REPLACEMENT
Page 199 and 200:
CEMENT IN HIP AND KNEE REPLACEMENT
Page 201 and 202:
Table C3: Top 10 Cements used in Re
Page 203 and 204:
Table C7: Yearly Cumulative Percent
Page 205 and 206:
Table C11: Yearly Cumulative Percen
Page 207 and 208:
MORTALITY FOLLOWING PRIMARY HIP AND
Page 209 and 210:
Table M5: Mortality following Prima
Page 211 and 212:
Appendices APPENDIX 1 Glossary of S
Page 213 and 214:
APPENDIX 2 Patient Consent and Conf
Page 215 and 216:
INTRODUCTION - about the Registry A
Page 217 and 218:
APPENDIX 5 ICD-10-AM Codes PRIMARY
show all

Hip and Knee Arthroplasty - Surface Hippy Guide to Hip Resurfacing

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?