Indications for early hip revision surgery in the UK - a re-analysis of NJR data

This study determined the rate and indication for revision between cemented, uncemented, hybrid and resurfacing groups from NJR (6th edition) data. Data validity was determined by interrogating for episodes of misclassification. We identified 6,034 (2.7%) misclassified episodes, containing 97 (4.3%) revisions. Kaplan-Meier revision rates at 3 years were 0.9% cemented, 1.9% for uncemented, 1.2% for hybrids and 3.0% for resurfacings (significant difference across all groups, p<0.001, with identical pattern in patients <55 years). Regression analysis indicated both prosthesis group and age significantly influenced failure (p<0.001). Revision for pain, aseptic loosening, and malalignment were highest in uncemented and resurfacing arthroplasty. Revision for dislocation was highest in uncemented hips (significant difference between groups, p<0.001). Feedback to the NJR on data misclassification has been made for future analysis.