ArticleBMC musculoskeletal disorders2024
Best timing of bilateral total hip arthroplasty - an analysis of revision and mortality rates from the German Arthroplasty Registry (EPRD).
Article in BMC musculoskeletal disorders, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe burden of osteoarthritis (OA) in multiple joints is high and for patients with bilateral OA of the hip there is no clear recommendation about the indication for simultaneous (one-stage) bilateral total hip arthroplasty (THA) versus two-staged procedures. The purpose of this study was therefore to compare revision and mortality rates after different strategies of surgical timing in bilateral hip OA from the German Arthroplasty Registry (EPRD).
methodsSince 2012 22,500 patients with bilateral THA (including 767 patients with one-staged bilateral surgery and 11,796 patients with another separate procedures within one year after first THA) are documented in the registry. The patients who underwent simultaneous bilateral THA were matched with a cohort of 767 patients who underwent the second THA between 1 and 90 days postoperatively (short interval) and another cohort of 4,602 patients with THA between 91 and 365 days postoperatively (intermediate interval). Revision for all reasons and mortality rates were recorded. Cox regression was performed to evaluate the influence of different patient characteristics.
resultsThe cumulative 5-year revision rate for patients with simultaneous bilateral THA was 1.8% (95% CI 0.9-2.6), for patients with two-staged THA 2.3% (95% CI 1.0-3.6) in the short interval and 2.5% (95% CI 2.1-2.9) in the intermediate interval, respectively. In all three groups, patients who underwent THA in a high-volume center (≥ 500 THA per year) had a significant lower risk for revision (HR 0.687; 95% CI 0.501-0.942) compared to surgeries in a low-volume center (< 250 THA per year). There was no significant difference regarding cumulative mortality rates in the three cohorts. Higher age (HR 1.060; 95% CI 1.042-1.078) and severe comorbidities as reflected in the Elixhauser Score (HR 1.046; 95% CI 1.014-1.079) were associated with higher mortality rates after simultaneous THA.
conclusionSimultaneous bilateral THA seems to be a safe procedure for younger patients with limited comorbidities who have bilateral end-stage hip OA, especially if performed in high-volume centers. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.