Abstract:BACKGROUND: Revision THA and TKA are growing and important clinical and economic challenges. Healthcare systems tend to combine revision joint replacement procedures into a single service line, and differences between revision THA and revision TKA remain incompletely characterized. These differences carry implications for guiding care and resource allocation. We therefore evaluated epidemiologic trends associated with revision THAs and TKAs.QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: We sought to determine differences in (1) the number of patients undergoing revision TKA and THA and respective demographic trends; (2) differences in the indications for and types of revision TKA and THA; (3) differences in patient severity of illness scoring between THA and TKA; and (4) differences in resource utilization (including cost and length of stay [LOS]) between revision THA and TKA.METHODS: The Nationwide Inpatient Sample (NIS) was used to evaluate 235,857 revision THAs and 301,718 revision TKAs between October 1, 2005 and December 31, 2010. Patient characteristics, procedure information, and resource utilization were compared across revision THAs and TKAs. A revision burden (ratio of number of revisions to total number of revision and primary surgeries) was calculated for hip and knee procedures. Severity of illness scoring and cost calculations were derived from the NIS. As our study was principally descriptive, statistical analyses generally were not performed; however, owing to the large sample size available to us through this NIS analysis, even small observed differences presented are likely to be highly statistically significant.RESULTS: Revision TKAs increased by 39% (revision burden, 9.1%-9.6%) and THAs increased by 23% (revision burden, 15.4%-14.6%). Revision THAs were performed more often in older patients compared with revision TKAs. Periprosthetic joint infection (25%) and mechanical loosening (19%) were the most common reasons for revision TKA compared with dislocation (22%) and mechanical loosening (20%) for revision THA. Full (all-component) revision was more common in revision THAs (43%) than in TKAs (37%). Patients who underwent revision THA generally were sicker (> 50% major severity of illness score) than patients who underwent revision TKA (65% moderate severity of illness score). Mean LOS was longer for revision THAs than for TKAs. Mean hospitalization costs were slightly higher for revision THA (USD 24,697 +/- USD 40,489 [SD]) than revision TKA (USD 23,130 +/- USD 36,643 [SD]). Periprosthetic joint infection and periprosthetic fracture were associated with the greatest LOS and costs for revision THAs and TKAs.CONCLUSIONS: These data could prove important for healthcare systems to appropriately allocate resources to hip and knee procedures: the revision burden for THA is 52% greater than for TKA, but revision TKAs are increasing at a faster rate. Likewise, the treating clinician should understand that while both revision THAs and TKAs bear significant clinical and economic costs, patients undergoing revision THA tend to be older, sicker, and have greater costs of care.

A 0.028% THD+N, 91% power-efficiency, 3-level PWM Class-D amplifier with a true differential front-end

The Effect of Surgical Approach and Femoral Prosthesis Type on Revision Rates Following Total Hip Arthroplasty

A comparison of cemented femoral fixation via anterior versus posterior approach total hip arthroplasty: an analysis of 60,739 total hip arthroplasties

Evaluation of Causes and Clinical Effects of Revision Surgery after Artificial Hip Replacement

Effect of femoral head size and surgical approach on risk of revision for dislocation after total hip arthroplasty

Does Approach Matter in Robotic-Assisted Total Hip Arthroplasty? A Comparison of Early Re-operations Between Direct Anterior and Postero-lateral Approach

Describing the clinical reasoning process: Application of a model of enablement to a pediatric case

Comparative studies on antioxidant activities of extracts from the leaf, stem and berry of Myrtus communis L.

A Comparison of Revision Rates for Dislocation and Aseptic Causes Between Dual Mobility and Large Femoral Head Bearings in Primary Total Hip Arthroplasty With Subanalysis by Acetabular Component Size: An Analysis of 106,163 Primary Total Hip Arthroplasties

Similar Medium-Term Revision Rates Following Acute Total Hip Arthroplasty Versus Open Reduction and Internal Fixation for Acetabular Fractures in the Elderly

Stemless Anatomic and Reverse Shoulder Arthroplasty in Patients under 55 years of age with Primary Glenohumeral Osteoarthritis: An analysis of the Australian Orthopaedic Association National Joint Replacement Registry at five years

Comparative Epidemiology of Revision Arthroplasty: Failed THA Poses Greater Clinical and Economic Burdens Than Failed TKA

Hospital Resource Utilization for Primary and Revision Total Hip Arthroplasty

Contemporary Aseptic Revision Total Hip Arthroplasty in Patients ≤50 Years of Age

[Kidney diseases caused by burying in the Agadir earthquake (apropos of 70 cases)].

The risk of revision is higher following shoulder hemiarthroplasty compared with total shoulder arthroplasty for osteoarthritis: a matched cohort study of 11,556 patients from the National Joint Registry, UK

Periprosthetic femoral fractures in Total Hip Arthroplasty (THA): a comparison between osteosynthesis and revision in a retrospective cohort study

Virtual predators, receiver psychology and doubts about Müllerian mimicry: comments on MacDougall & Dawkins

[Angina pectoris is as expensive as myocardial infarction. An unexpected result of a study].

Acute Total Hip Arthroplasty Following Acetabular Fracture is Associated with a High Risk of Revision, Dislocation, and Periprosthetic Fracture