Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Cohort analysis of two thousand nine hundred forty-three Link Lubinus SP II cemented total hip arthroplasties from a single hospital with surgeon stratification and twenty six thousand, nine hundred and eighty one component-years of follow-up

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
International Orthopaedics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

Cemented total hip endoprosthesis Link Lubinus SP II has been used for decades with very good results in arthroplasty registries, but surgeon-stratified reports of endoprosthetic survival are very rare. The aim of the presented single hospital cohort analysis of this implant was to determine Link Lubinus SP II survival rates 10/15/20/25/30 years after the primary implantation and to find out whether endoprosthesis survival depended on patients’ age, gender, operated side, implanted femoral head diameter, and the operating surgeon.

Methods

The study included 2943 consecutive primary Link Lubinus SP II hip endoprostheses implanted at the University Medical Centre Ljubljana, Department of Orthopaedic Surgery (Ljubljana, Slovenia) between January 1, 1985, and December 31, 2018. Kaplan–Meier analysis and Cox regression were performed after minimum two and maximum 30 years of follow-up.

Results

At 10/15/20/25/30 years after implantation, the estimated cumulative proportion of revision-free surviving Link Lubinus SP II total hip endoprostheses was 94/90/88/87/87% and the cumulative proportion with unremoved endoprosthetic components was 96/93/90/89/89%, respectively. Higher patient’s age at operation was associated with lower risk of subsequent implant removal (hazard ratio 0.97 for each additional year of age; 95% confidence interval 0.95–0.99; p = 0.00), while the patient’s gender, the implanted femoral head diameter, and the operating surgeon had no significant impact on implant survival.

Conclusion

The study presents the largest published Link Lubinus SP II total hip arthroplasty cohort from a single non-developmental hospital with 26,981 component-years of observation. The findings highlight excellent outcomes of this implant in the elderly population, regardless of performance variability between surgeons.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

Data availability

Anonymized data is available through the data repository https://doi.org/10.17632/2tcgdjn7ct.1

References

  1. Mäkelä KT, Matilainen M, Pulkkinen P et al (2014) Failure rate of cemented and uncemented total hip replacements: register study of combined Nordic database of four nations. BMJ 348:f7592. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.f7592

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Lubinus P, Klauser W, Schwantes B, Eberle R (2002) Cemented total hip arthroplasty: the SP-II femoral component. GIOT 6:221–226

    Google Scholar 

  3. Savilahti S, Myllyneva I, Pajamäki KJJ, Lindholm TS (1997) Survival of Lubinus straight (IP) and curved (SP) total hip prostheses in 543 patients after 4–13 years. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 116(1–2):10–13. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00434092

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Surace FM, Salerno P, Ferrero Regis G, Annaratone G (2000) Survival analysis of the cemented SPII stem. J Orthop Traumatol 1:41–45. https://doi.org/10.1007/s101950070027

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Catani F, Ensini A, Leardini A et al (2005) Migration of cemented stem and restrictor after total hip arthroplasty: a radiostereometry study of 25 patients with Lubinus SP II stem. J Arthroplasty 20(2):244–249. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arth.2004.09.039

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Wierer T, Forst R, Mueller LA, Sesselmann S (2013) Radiostereometric migration analysis of the Lubinus SP II hip stem: 59 hips followed for 2 years. Biomed Tech 58(4):333–341. https://doi.org/10.1515/bmt-2012-0038

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Prins W, Meijer R, Kollen BJ et al (2014) Excellent results with the cemented Lubinus SP II 130-mm femoral stem at 10 years of follow-up: 932 hips followed for 5–15 years. Acta Orthop 85(3):276–279. https://doi.org/10.3109/17453674.2014.908342

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  8. Sesselmann S, Hong Y, Schlemmer F et al (2017) Migration measurement of the cemented Lubinus SP II hip stem - a 10-year follow-up using radiostereometric analysis. Biomed Tech 62(3):271–278. https://doi.org/10.1515/bmt-2015-0172

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Mäkelä K, Eskelinen A, Pulkkinen P et al (2008) Cemented total hip replacement for primary osteoarthritis in patients aged 55 years or older: results of the 12 most common cemented implants followed for 25 years in the Finnish arthroplasty register. J Bone Joint Surg Br 90B(12):1562–1569. https://doi.org/10.1302/0301-620X.90B12.21151

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Espehaug B, Furnes O, Engester LB, Havelin LI (2009) 18 years of results with cemented primary hip prostheses in the Norwegian Arthroplasty Register concerns about some newer implants. Acta Orthop 80(4):402–412. https://doi.org/10.3109/17453670903161124

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  11. Hailer NP, Garellick G, Kärrholm J (2010) Uncemented and cemented primary total hip arthroplasty in the Swedish Hip Arthroplasty Register: evaluation of 170,413 operations. Acta Orthop 81(1):34–41. https://doi.org/10.3109/17453671003685400

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  12. Thien TM, Kärrholm J (2010) Design-related risk factors for revision of primary cemented stems: analysis of 3 common stems in the Swedish Hip Arthroplasty Register. Acta Orthop 81(4):407–412. https://doi.org/10.3109/17453674.2010.501739

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  13. Lindgren V, Garellick G, Kärrholm J, Wretenberg P (2012) The type of surgical approach influences the risk of revision in total hip arthroplasty: a study from the Swedish Hip Arthroplasty Register of 90,662 total hip replacements with 3 different cemented prostheses. Acta Orthop 83(6):559–565. https://doi.org/10.3109/17453674.2012.742394

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  14. Junnila M, Laaksonen I, Eskelinen A et al (2016) Implant survival of the most common cemented total hip devices from the Nordic Arthroplasty Register Association database. Acta Orthop 87(6):546–553. https://doi.org/10.1080/17453674.2016.1222804

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  15. Mukka S, Mellner C, Knutsson B et al (2016) Substantially higher prevalence of postoperative peri­prosthetic fractures in octogenarians with hip fractures operated with a cemented, polished tapered stem rather than an anatomic stem. Acta Orthop 87(3):257–261. https://doi.org/10.3109/17453674.2016.1162898

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  16. Chatziagorou G, Lindahl H, Kärrholm J (2019) The design of the cemented stem influences the risk of Vancouver type B fractures, but not of type C: an analysis of 82,837 Lubinus SPII and Exeter Polished stems. Acta Orthop 90(2):135–142. https://doi.org/10.1080/17453674.2019.1574387

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  17. Thien T, Chatziagorou G, Garellick G et al (2014) Periprosthetic femoral fracture within two years after total hip replacement: analysis of 437,629 operations in the Nordic Arthroplasty Register Association database. J Bone Jt Surg Am 96(19):e167

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Li MG, Rohrl SM, Wood DJ, Nivbrant B (2007) Periprosthetic changes in bone mineral density in 5 stem designs 5 years after cemented total hip arthroplasty. No relation to stem migration. J Arthroplasty 22(5):689–691. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arth.2006.05.035

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Valdoltra Orthopaedic Hospital. (2019) The National Arthroplasty Registry of Slovenia Ankaran: Ortopedska bolnišnica Valdoltra. https://www.ob-valdoltra.si/sl/international. Accessed 1 Nov 2021

  20. Roškar S, Antolič V, Mavčič B (2020) Surgeon-stratified cohort analysis of 1976 cementless Zweymüller total hip arthroplasties from a single hospital with 23,255 component years of follow-up. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 140(9):1275–1283. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00402-020-03517-0

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Dy CJ, Bozic KJ, Pan TJ et al (2014) Risk factors for early revision after total hip arthroplasty. Arthritis Care Res 66(6):907–915. https://doi.org/10.1002/acr.22240

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Thien TM, Thanner J, Kärrholm J (2010) Randomized comparison between 3 surface treatments of a single anteverted stem design. 84 hips followed for 5 Years. J Arthroplasty 25(3):437-444.e1. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arth.2009.01.015

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Mellner C, Mohammed J, Larsson M et al (2021) Increased risk for postoperative periprosthetic fracture in hip fracture patients with the Exeter stem than the anatomic SP2 Lubinus stem. Eur J Trauma Emerg Surg 47(3):803–809. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00068-019-01263-6

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Jolbäck P, Rolfson O, Mohaddes M et al (2018) Does surgeon experience affect patient-reported outcomes 1 year after primary total hip arthroplasty?: a register-based study of 6,713 cases in western Sweden. Acta Orthop 89(3):265–271. https://doi.org/10.1080/17453674.2018.1444300

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  25. Wilson MD, Dowsey MM, Spelman T, Choong PFM (2016) Impact of surgical experience on outcomes in total joint arthroplasties. ANZ J Surg 86(12):967–972. https://doi.org/10.1111/ans.13513

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Hasegawa Y, Amano T (2015) Surgical skills training for primary total hip arthroplasty. Nagoya J Med Sci 77(1–2):51–57

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  27. Ravi B, Jenkinson R, Austin PC et al (2014) Relation between surgeon volume and risk of complications after total hip arthroplasty: propensity score matched cohort study. BMJ 348:g3284. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.g3284

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  28. Hooper GJ, Rothwell AG, Stringer M, Frampton C (2009) Revision following cemented and uncemented primary total hip replacement. J Bone Joint Surg Br 91B(4):451–458. https://doi.org/10.1302/0301-620X.91B4.21363

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Evans JT, Blom AW, Timperley AJ et al (2020) Factors associated with implant survival following total hip replacement surgery: a registry study of data from the National Joint Registry of England, Wales, Northern Ireland and the Isle of Man. PLoS Med 17(8):e1003291. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1003291

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors express gratitude to all the surgeons of the University Medical Centre Ljubljana, Department of Orthopaedic Surgery who performed the surgical procedures.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Faculty of Medicine, University of Ljubljana, Zaloška 9, 1000, Ljubljana, Slovenia

    Luka Kropivšek, Samo Roškar, Lenart Andrej Zore, Vane Antolič & Blaž Mavčič

  2. Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, University Medical Centre Ljubljana, Zaloška 9, 1000, Ljubljana, Slovenia

    Lenart Andrej Zore, Vane Antolič & Blaž Mavčič

Authors
  1. Luka Kropivšek
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Samo Roškar
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Lenart Andrej Zore
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Vane Antolič
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Blaž Mavčič
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

LK performed investigation, analyzed the data, and drafted the manuscript. SR and LAR were involved with data acquisition and data analysis and interpretation. VA performed surgical work, conceptualization, provision of resources, and supervision. BM participated with surgical work, data acquisition and analysis, conceptualization, writing, and finalization of the manuscript. All authors contributed to the research paper and approved the final version.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Blaž Mavčič.

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval

The presented non-interventional observational retrospective study was approved by the National Medical Ethics Committee of the Republic of Slovenia on August 6, 2019 (case no. 0120–368/2019/4).

Consent to participate

In view of the retrospective observational nature of the study, anonymized pooled data, and all the procedures being performed as part of the routine care, the National Medical Ethics Committee of the Republic of Slovenia (on August 6, 2019, case no. 0120–368/2019/4) has confirmed that for this type of study formal informed consent to participate is not required.

Consent for publication

In view of the retrospective observational nature of the study, anonymized pooled data, and all the procedures being performed as part of the routine care, the National Medical Ethics Committee of the Republic of Slovenia (on August 6, 2019, case No. 0120–368/2019/4) has confirmed that for this type of study formal informed consent to publish is not required.

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher's note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Kropivšek, L., Roškar, S., Zore, L.A. et al. Cohort analysis of two thousand nine hundred forty-three Link Lubinus SP II cemented total hip arthroplasties from a single hospital with surgeon stratification and twenty six thousand, nine hundred and eighty one component-years of follow-up. International Orthopaedics (SICOT) 46, 797–804 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00264-022-05315-2

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00264-022-05315-2

Keywords

Search

Navigation