The Interaction Effect Between Previous Stroke and Hip Fracture on Postoperative Mortality:A Nationwide Cohort Study

PURPOSE: It remains uncertain how a history of stroke impacts the prognosis for patients with hip fracture. This study aimed to evaluate mortality following hip fracture surgery by comparing patients with and without a history of stroke. PATIENTS AND METHODS: All patients aged 65 years or above in Denmark receiving hip fracture surgery between 2010 and 2018. For every patient, 10 individuals from the general population without hip fracture were sampled. Comparators had a similar stroke history, age, and sex on the date of hip fracture surgery (index date). We established four cohorts: hip fracture patients with/without stroke and non-hip fracture patients with/without stroke. Outcomes were all-cause mortality at 0–30 days, 31–365 days and 1 to 5 years. Direct standardized mortality rates (MR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) were computed. We calculated the interaction contrast to estimate excess absolute mortality among patients with both hip fracture and stroke. Through a Cox proportional hazards model, we estimated the hazard ratio (HR) and the attributable proportion as a measure of excess relative mortality attributable to interaction. RESULTS: Of the hip fracture patients, 8433 had a stroke history and 44,997 did not. Of the non-hip fracture patients, 84,330 had a stroke history and 449,962 did not. Corresponding 30-day MRs/100 person years were 148.4 (95% CI: 138.8–158.7), 124.3 (95% CI: 120.7–128.1), 14.3 (95% CI: 13.4–15.2) and 8.4 (95% CI: 8.1–8.7). The interaction contrast was 18.2 (95% CI: 7.5–28.8), and the attributable proportion was 9.0% (95% CI: 2.9–15.1). No interaction was present beyond 30 days. CONCLUSION: We observed excess short-term mortality in patients with stroke and hip fracture, but the effect disappeared at later follow-up periods. Clinicians are encouraged to pay rigorous attention to early complications among hip fracture patients with stroke, as this may serve as a way to reduce mortality

Exploring needs, barriers to, and facilitators of rehabilitation exercise following revision hip replacement - a grounded theory study

Purpose: Evidence on rehabilitation after revision total hip replacement (THR) is inadequate and development of rehabilitation interventions is warranted. Even so, little is known about patients’ experiences with revision THR rehabilitation. This study aimed to explore patients' rehabilitation exercise experiences after revision THR.Materials and methods: Using constructivist grounded theory, we conducted semi-structured qualitative interviews with twelve patients with completed or almost completed rehabilitation exercise after revision THR. Data collection and analysis were a constant comparative process conducted in three phases; initial, focused, and theoretical.Findings: From the data, we generated a substantial theory of the participant’s circumstances and ability to integrate rehabilitation exercise into their everyday life after revision THR. Four categories were constructed based on patients’ experiences in different contexts: hesitance, fear avoidance, self-commitment, and fidelity.Conclusions: This study highlighted that patients’ expectations, past experiences, attitudes, trusts, engagement, and circumstances interact to influence engagement and adherence to rehabilitation exercise and described four categories relating to the integration of THR rehabilitation exercise into their everyday life. Clinicians should be aware of and account for these categories during rehabilitation exercise. Tailored individual rehabilitation exercise interventions and clinician approaches to optimize commitment and adherence are needed among patients with revision THR

Outcome in design-specific comparisons between highly crosslinked and conventional polyethylene in total hip arthroplasty

<p>Background and purpose — Most registry studies regarding highly crosslinked polyethylene (XLPE) have focused on the overall revision risk. We compared the risk of cup and/or liner revision for specific cup and liner designs made of either XLPE or conventional polyethylene (CPE), regarding revision for any reason and revision due to aseptic loosening and/or osteolysis.</p> <p>Patients and methods — Using the Nordic Arthroplasty Register Association (NARA) database, we identified cup and liner designs where either XLPE or CPE had been used in more than 500 THAs performed for primary hip osteoarthritis. We assessed risk of revision for any reason and for aseptic loosening using Cox regression adjusted for age, sex, femoral head material and size, surgical approach, stem fixation, and presence of hydroxyapatite coating (uncemented cups).</p> <p>Results — The CPE version of the ZCA cup had a risk of revision for any reason similar to that of the XLPE version (p = 0.09), but showed a 6-fold higher risk of revision for aseptic loosening (p < 0.001). The CPE version of the Reflection All Poly cup had an 8-fold elevated risk of revision for any reason (p < 0.001) and a 5-fold increased risk of revision for aseptic loosening (p < 0.001). The Charnley Elite Ogee/Marathon cup and the Trilogy cup did not show such differences.</p> <p>Interpretation — Whether XLPE has any advantage over CPE regarding revision risk may depend on the properties of the polyethylene materials being compared, as well as the respective cup designs, fixation type, and follow-up times. Further research is needed to elucidate how cup design factors interact with polyethylene type to affect the risk of revision.</p

Different incidences of knee arthroplasty in the Nordic countries.

To access publisher's full text version of this article, please click on the hyperlink in Additional Links field or click on the hyperlink at the top of the page marked FilesBackground and purpose - The annual number of total knee arthroplasties (TKAs) has increased worldwide in recent years. To make projections regarding future needs for primaries and revisions, additional knowledge is important. We analyzed and compared the incidences among 4 Nordic countries Patients and methods - Using Nordic Arthroplasty Register Association (NARA) data from 4 countries, we analyzed differences between age and sex groups. We included patients over 30 years of age who were operated with TKA or unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) during the period 1997-2012. The negative binomial regression model was used to analyze changes in general trends and in sex and age groups. Results - The average annual increase in the incidence of TKA was statistically significant in all countries. The incidence of TKA was higher in women than in men in all 4 countries. It was highest in Finland in patients aged 65 years or more. At the end of the study period in 2012, Finland's total incidence was double that of Norway, 1.3 times that of Sweden and 1.4 times that of Denmark. The incidence was lowest in the youngest age groups (< 65 years) in all 4 countries. The proportional increase in incidence was highest in patients who were younger than 65 years. Interpretation - The incidence of knee arthroplasty steadily increased in the 4 countries over the study period. The differences between the countries were considerable, with the highest incidence in Finland. Patients aged 65 years or more contributed to most of the total incidence of knee arthroplasty.NordForsk gran

Total hip arthroplasties in the Dutch Arthroplasty Register (LROI) and the Nordic Arthroplasty Register Association (NARA): comparison of patient and procedure characteristics in 475,685 cases

Background and purpose — Collaborations between arthroplasty registries are important in order to create the possibility of detecting inferior implants early and improve our understanding of differences between nations in terms of indications and outcomes. In this registry study we compared patient and procedure characteristics, and revision rates in the Nordic Arthroplasty Register Association (NARA) database and the Dutch Arthroplasty Register (LROI). Patients and methods — All total hip arthroplasties (THAs) performed in 2010–2016 were included from the LROI (n = 184,862) and the NARA database (n = 290,823), which contains data from Denmark, Norway, Sweden, and Finland. Descriptive statistics and Kaplan–Meier survival analyses based on all reasons for revision and stratified by fixation were performed and compared between countries. Results — In the Netherlands, the proportion of patients aged < 55 years (9%) and male patients (34%) was lower than in Nordic countries (< 55 years 11–13%; males 35–43%); the proportion of osteoarthritis (OA) (87%) was higher compared with Sweden (81%), Norway (77%), and Denmark (81%) but comparable to Finland (86%). Uncemented fixation was used in 62% of patients in the Netherlands, in 70% of patients in Denmark and Finland, and in 28% and 19% in Norway and Sweden, respectively. The 5-year revision rate for THAs for OA was lower in Sweden (2.3%, 95% CI 2.1–2.5) than in the Netherlands (3.0%, CI 2.9–3.1), Norway (3.8%, CI 3.6–4.0), Denmark (4.6%, CI 4.4–4.8), and Finland (4.4%, CI 4.3–4.5). Revision rates in Denmark, Norway, and Finland were higher for all fixation groups. Interpretation — Patient and THA procedure characteristics as well as revision rates evinced some differences between the Netherlands and the Nordic countries. The Netherlands compared best with Denmark in terms of patient and procedure characteristics, but resembled Sweden more in terms of short-term revision risk. Combining data from registries like LROI and the NARA collaboration is feasible and might possibly enable tracking of potential outlier implants.publishedVersio

Hydroxyapatite coating does not improve uncemented stem survival after total hip arthroplasty!: An analysis of 116,069 THAs in the Nordic Arthroplasty Register Association (NARA) database

Background and purpose — It is still being debated whether HA coating of uncemented stems used in total hip arthroplasty (THA) improves implant survival. We therefore investigated different uncemented stem brands, with and without HA coating, regarding early and long-term survival. Patients and methods — We identified 152,410 THA procedures using uncemented stems that were performed between 1995 and 2011 and registered in the Nordic Arthroplasty Register Association (NARA) database. We excluded 19,446 procedures that used stem brands less than 500 times in each country, procedures performed due to diagnoses other than osteoarthritis or pediatric hip disease, and procedures with missing information on the type of coating. 22 stem brands remained (which were used in 116,069 procedures) for analysis of revision of any component. 79,192 procedures from Denmark, Norway, and Sweden were analyzed for the endpoint stem revision. Unadjusted survival rates were calculated according to Kaplan-Meier, and Cox proportional hazards models were fitted in order to calculate hazard ratios (HRs) for the risk of revision with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Results — Unadjusted 10-year survival with the endpoint revision of any component for any reason was 92.1% (CI: 91.8–92.4). Unadjusted 10-year survival with the endpoint stem revision due to aseptic loosening varied between the stem brands investigated and ranged from 96.7% (CI: 94.4–99.0) to 99.9% (CI: 99.6–100). Of the stem brands with the best survival, stems with and without HA coating were found. The presence of HA coating was not associated with statistically significant effects on the adjusted risk of stem revision due to aseptic loosening, with an HR of 0.8 (CI: 0.5–1.3; p = 0.4). The adjusted risk of revision due to infection was similar in the groups of THAs using HA-coated and non-HA-coated stems, with an HR of 0.9 (CI: 0.8–1.1; p = 0.6) for the presence of HA coating. The commonly used Bimetric stem (n = 25,329) was available both with and without HA coating, and the adjusted risk of stem revision due to aseptic loosening was similar for the 2 variants, with an HR of 0.9 (CI: 0.5–1.4; p = 0.5) for the HA-coated Bimetric stem. Interpretation — Uncemented HA-coated stems had similar results to those of uncemented stems with porous coating or rough sand-blasted stems. The use of HA coating on stems available both with and without this surface treatment had no clinically relevant effect on their outcome, and we thus question whether HA coating adds any value to well-functioning stem designs.publishedVersio