The Epidemiology of Revision Total Hip Arthroplasty in the United States
Top Cited Papers
- 1 January 2009
- journal article
- Published by Wolters Kluwer Health in Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery
- Vol. 91 (1), 128-133
- https://doi.org/10.2106/jbjs.h.00155
Abstract
Background: Understanding the causes of failure and the types of revision total hip arthroplasty performed is essential for guiding research, implant design, clinical decision-making, and health-care policy. The purpose of the present study was to evaluate the mechanisms of failure and the types of revision total hip arthroplasty procedures performed in the United States with use of newly implemented ICD-9-CM (International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, Clinical Modification) diagnosis and procedure codes related specifically to revision total hip arthroplasty in a large, nationally representative population. Methods: The Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project Nationwide Inpatient Sample database was used to analyze clinical, demographic, and economic data from 51,345 revision total hip arthroplasty procedures performed between October 1, 2005, and December 31, 2006. The prevalence of revision procedures was calculated for population subgroups in the United States that were stratified according to age, sex, diagnosis, census region, primary payer class, and type of hospital. The cause of failure, the average length of stay, and total charges were also determined for each type of revision arthroplasty procedure. Results: The most common type of revision total hip arthroplasty procedure performed was all-component revision (41.1%), and the most common causes of revision were instability/dislocation (22.5%), mechanical loosening (19.7%), and infection (14.8%). Revision total hip arthroplasty procedures were most commonly performed in large, urban, nonteaching hospitals for Medicare patients seventy-five to eighty-four years of age. The average length of hospital stay for all types of revision arthroplasties was 6.2 days, and the average total charges were $54,553. However, the average length of stay, average charges, and procedure frequencies varied considerably according to census region, hospital type, and type of revision total hip arthroplasty procedure performed. Conclusions: Hip instability and mechanical loosening are the most common indications for revision total hip arthroplasty in the United States. As further experience is gained with the new diagnosis and procedure codes specifically related to revision total hip arthroplasty, this information will be valuable in directing future research, implant design, and clinical decision-making. Level of Evidence: Prognostic Level II. See Instructions to Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.Keywords
This publication has 14 references indexed in Scilit:
- Total hip arthroplasties: What are the reasons for revision?International Orthopaedics, 2007
- Projections of Primary and Revision Hip and Knee Arthroplasty in the United States from 2005 to 2030Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery, 2007
- Dislocation of Primary Total Hip Arthroplasty with 36 and 40-mm Femoral HeadsClinical Orthopaedics and Related Research, 2006
- Role of Capsular Repair on Dislocation in Revision Total Hip ArthroplastyClinical Orthopaedics and Related Research, 2006
- Economic Burden of Revision Hip and Knee Arthroplasty in Medicare EnrolleesClinical Orthopaedics and Related Research, 2006
- Dislocation of Primary THA Done through a Posterolateral Approach in the ElderlyClinical Orthopaedics and Related Research, 2005
- An AOA Critical Issue The Outcome of the Outcomes Movement*Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery, 2004
- The Finnish Arthroplasty Register: Report of the hip registerActa Orthopaedica, 2001
- Outcome after total hip arthroplasty: Part II. Disease-specific follow-up and the Swedish National Total Hip Arthroplasty RegisterActa Orthopaedica, 2001
- Outcome after total hip arthroplasty: Part I. General health evaluation in relation to definition of failure in the Swedish National Total Hip Arthroplasty registerActa Orthopaedica, 2000