Primary Arthroplasty| Volume 35, ISSUE 1, P188-192.e2, January 2020

Patient Characteristics Influence Revision Rate of Total Hip Arthroplasty: American Society of Anesthesiologists Score and Body Mass Index Were the Strongest Predictors for Short-Term Revision After Primary Total Hip Arthroplasty

Published:August 14, 2019DOI:



      Outcome and survival after primary total hip arthroplasty (THA) can be affected by patient characteristics. We examined the effect of case-mix on revision after primary THA using the Dutch Arthroplasty Register.


      Our cohort included all primary THAs (n = 218,214) performed in patients with osteoarthritis in the Netherlands between 2007 and 2018. Multivariable logistic regression analysis was used to calculate the difference in survivorship in patients with different patient characteristics (age, gender, American Society of Anesthesiologists [ASA] score, body mass index [BMI], Charnley score, smoking, and previous operations to the hip).


      Case-mix factors associated with an increased risk for revision 1 year after THA were the following: a high ASA score (II and III-IV) (odds ratio [OR] 1.5, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.1-2.0 and OR 3.0, 95% CI 1.7-5.3), a higher BMI (30-40 and >40) (OR 1.4, 95% CI 1.2-1.5 and OR 2.0, 95% CI 1.4-1.7), age ≥75 years (OR 1.5, 95% CI 1.1-2.0), and male gender (OR 1.3, 95% CI 1.2-1.4). A similar model for 3-year revision showed comparable results. High BMI (OR 1.9, 95% CI 1.3-2.9), a previous hip operation (OR 1.8, 95% CI 1.3-2.5), ASA III-IV (OR 1.2, 95% CI 1-1.6), and Charnley score C (OR 1.5, 95% CI 1.1-2.2) were associated with increased risk for revision. Main reasons for revision in obese and ASA II-IV patients were infection, dislocation, and periprosthetic fracture. Patients with femoral neck fracture and late post-traumatic pathology were more likely to be revised within 3 years, compared to osteoarthritis patients (OR 1.5, 95% CI 1.3-1.7 and OR 1.5, 95% CI 1.2-1.7).


      The short-term risk for revision after primary THA is influenced by case-mix factors. ASA score and BMI (especially >40) were the strongest predictors for 1-year revision after primary THA. After 3 years, BMI and previous hip surgery were independent risk factors for revision. This will help surgeons to identify and counsel high-risk patients and take appropriate preventive measures.


      To read this article in full you will need to make a payment

      Purchase one-time access:

      Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online access
      One-time access price info
      • For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
      • For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'


      Subscribe to The Journal of Arthroplasty
      Already a print subscriber? Claim online access
      Already an online subscriber? Sign in
      Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect


        • Lekander I.
        • Willers C.
        • Ekstrand E.
        • von Euler M.
        • Fagervall-Yttling B.
        • Henricson L.
        • Kostulas K.
        • Lilja M.
        • Sunnerhagen K.S.
        • Teichert J.
        • Pessah-Rasmussen H.
        • et al.
        Hospital comparison of stroke care in Sweden: a register based study.
        BMJ Open. 2017; 7: e015244
        • Burns E.M.
        • Pettengell C.
        • Athanasiou T.
        • Darzi A.
        Understanding the strengths and weaknesses of public reporting of surgeon-specific outcome data.
        Health Aff (Millwood). 2016; 35: 415-421
        • SooHoo N.F.
        • Li Z.
        • Chan V.
        • Chenok K.
        • Bozic K.J.
        The importance of risk adjustment in reporting total joint arthroplasty outcomes.
        J Arthroplasty. 2016; 31: 590-595
        • Steenbergen van L.N.
        • Denissen G.A.
        • Spooren A.
        • van Rooden S.M.
        • Oosterhout van F.J.
        • Morrenhof J.W.
        • et al.
        More than 95% completeness of reported procedures in the population-based Dutch Arthroplasty Register.
        Acta Orthop. 2015; 86: 498-505
      1. Vektis.
        ([accessed 01.01.17])
        • Drummond J.
        • Tran P.
        • Fary C.
        Metal-on-metal hip arthroplasty: a review of adverse reactions and patient management.
        J Funct Biomater. 2015; 6: 486-499
        • Nederlandse Orthopaedisch Vereniging
        Advies Metaal-op-Metaal Heupprothesen per 1 augustus.
        ([accessed 02.07.2019])
        • Zijlstra W.P.
        • De Hartog B.
        • Van Steenbergen L.N.
        • Scheurs B.W.
        • Nelissen R.G.H.H.
        Effect of femoral head size and surgical approach on risk of revision for dislocation after total hip arthroplasty.
        Acta Orthop. 2017; 88: 392-401
        • Peters R.M.
        • van Beers L.W.A.H.
        • Steenbergen van L.N.
        • Wolkenfelt J.
        • Ettema H.B.
        • Have ten B.L.E.F.
        • et al.
        Similar superior patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) for anterior and posterolateral approach after total hip arthroplasty in the Netherlands.
        J Arthroplasty. 2018; 33: 1786-1793
        • Lacny S.
        • Wilson T.
        • Clement F.
        • Roberts D.J.
        • Faris P.D.
        • Ghali W.A.
        • et al.
        Kaplan-Meier survival analysis overestimates the risk of revision arthroplasty: a meta analysis.
        Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2015; 473: 3431-3442
        • Wongworawat M.D.
        • Dobbs M.B.
        • Gebhardt M.C.
        • Gioe T.J.
        • Leopold S.S.
        • Manner P.A.
        • et al.
        Editorial: estimating survivorship in the face of competing risks.
        Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2015; 473: 1173-1176
        • Putter H.
        • Fiocco M.
        • Geskus R.B.
        Tutorial in biostatistics: competing risks and multi-state models.
        Stat Med. 2007; 26: 2389-2430
        • Keurentjes J.C.
        • Fiocco M.
        • Schreurs B.W.
        • Pijls B.G.
        • Nouta K.A.
        • Nelissen R.G.H.H.
        Revision surgery is overestimated in hip replacement.
        Bone Joint Res. 2012; 1: 258-262
        • Peters R.M.
        • Steenbergen van L.N.
        • Stevens M.
        • Rijk P.C.
        • Bulstra S.K.
        • Zijlstra W.P.
        The effect of bearing type on the outcome of total hip arthroplasty. Analyses of 209,912 primary total hip arthroplasty registered in the Dutch Arthroplasty Register.
        Acta Orthop. 2018 Apr; 89: 163-169
        • Schilling P.L.
        • Bozic K.J.
        Development and validation of perioperative risk-adjustment models for hip fracture repair, total hip arthroplasty, and total knee arthroplasty.
        J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2016; 98: e2
      2. National Joint Registry for England, Wales, Northern Ireland and the Isle of Man.
        (12th Annual Report) ([accessed 02.07.2019])
        • Wagner E.R.
        • Kamath A.F.
        • Fruth K.M.
        • Harmsen W.S.
        • Berry D.J.
        Effect of body mass index on complications and reoperations after total hip arthroplasty.
        J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2016; 98: 169-179
        • Löwik C.A.M.
        • Zijlstra W.P.
        • Knobben B.A.S.
        • Ploegmakers J.J.W.
        • Dijkstra B.
        • de Vries A.J.
        • et al.
        • Northern Infection Network Joint Arthroplasty (NINJA)
        Obese patients have higher rates of polymicrobial and Gram-negative early periprosthetic joint infections of the hip than non-obese patients.
        PLoS One. 2019; 14: e0215035
        • Jones C.W.
        • De Martino I.
        • D’Apolito R.
        • Nocon A.A.
        • Sculco P.K.
        • Sculco T.P.
        The use of dual-mobility bearings in patients at high risk of dislocation.
        Bone Joint J. 2019; 101-B: 41-45