Objectives To compare 10 year mortality
rates among patients undergoing metal-on-metal hip resurfacing and total
hip replacement in England.
Design Retrospective cohort study.
Setting English hospital episode statistics database linked to mortality records from the Office for National Statistics.
Population
All adults who underwent primary elective hip replacement for
osteoarthritis from April 1999 to March 2012. The exposure of interest
was prosthesis type: cemented total hip replacement, uncemented total
hip replacement, and metal-on-metal hip resurfacing. Confounding
variables included age, sex, Charlson comorbidity index, rurality, area
deprivation, surgical volume, and year of operation.
Main outcome measures
All cause mortality. Propensity score matching was used to minimise
confounding by indication. Kaplan-Meier plots estimated the probability
of survival up to 10 years after surgery. Multilevel Cox regression
modelling, stratified on matched sets, described the association between
prosthesis type and time to death, accounting for variation across
hospital trusts.
Results 7437 patients
undergoing metal-on-metal hip resurfacing were matched to 22 311
undergoing cemented total hip replacement; 8101 patients undergoing
metal-on-metal hip resurfacing were matched to 24 303 undergoing
uncemented total hip replacement. 10 year rates of cumulative mortality
were 271 (3.6%) for metal-on-metal hip resurfacing versus 1363 (6.1%)
for cemented total hip replacement, and 239 (3.0%) for metal-on-metal
hip resurfacing versus 999 (4.1%) for uncemented total hip replacement.
Patients undergoing metal-on-metal hip resurfacing had an increased
survival probability (hazard ratio 0.51 (95% confidence interval 0.45 to
0.59) for cemented hip replacement; 0.55 (0.47 to 0.65) for uncemented
hip replacement). There was no evidence for an interaction with age or
sex.
Conclusions Patients with hip
osteoarthritis undergoing metal-on-metal hip resurfacing have reduced
mortality in the long term compared with those undergoing cemented or
uncemented total hip replacement. This difference persisted after
extensive adjustment for confounding factors available in our data. The
study results can be applied to matched populations, which exclude
patients who are very old and have had complex total hip replacements.
Although residual confounding is possible, the observed effect size is
large. These findings require validation in external cohorts and
randomised clinical trials.
BMJ
2013;347:f6549
http://www.bmj.com/content/347/bmj.f6549
No comments:
Post a Comment