Research
Print page Print page
Switch language
The Capital Region of Denmark - a part of Copenhagen University Hospital
Published

12-year survival analysis of 322 Hintegra total ankle arthroplasties from an independent center

Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articleResearchpeer-review

  1. Why are patients still in hospital after fast-track, unilateral unicompartmental knee arthroplasty

    Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articleResearchpeer-review

  2. Minimal important change values for the Oxford Knee Score and the Forgotten Joint Score at 1 year after total knee replacement

    Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articleResearchpeer-review

  3. High risk for revision after shoulder arthroplasty for failed osteosynthesis of proximal humeral fractures

    Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articleResearchpeer-review

  4. Acetabular cup position and risk of dislocation in primary total hip arthroplasty

    Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articleResearchpeer-review

View graph of relations

Background and purpose - Total ankle arthroplasties (TAAs) have larger revision rates than hip and knee implants. We examined the survival rates of our primary TAAs, and what different factors, including the cause of arthritis, affect the success and/or revision rate.Patients and methods - From 2004 to 2016, 322 primary Hintegra TAAs were implanted: the 2nd generation implant from 2004 until mid-2007 and the 3rd generation from late 2007 to 2016. A Cox proportional hazards model evaluated sex, age, primary diagnosis, and implant generation, pre- and postoperative angles and implant position as risk factors for revision.Results - 60 implants (19%) were revised, the majority (n = 34) due to loosening. The 5-year survival rate (95% CI) was 75% (69-82) and the 10-year survival rate was 68% (60-77). There was a reduced risk of revision, per degree of increased postoperative medial distal tibial angle at 0.84 (0.72-0.98) and preoperative talus angle at 0.95 (0.90-1.00), indicating that varus ankles may have a larger revision rate. Generation of implant, sex, primary diagnosis, and most pre- and postoperative radiological angles did not statistically affect revision risk.Interpretation - Our revision rates are slightly above registry rates and well above those of the developer. Most were revised due to loosening; no difference was demonstrated with the 2 generations of implant used. Learning curve and a low threshold for revision could explain the high revision rate.

Original languageEnglish
JournalActa Orthopaedica (Online)
Volume91
Issue number4
Pages (from-to)444-449
Number of pages6
ISSN1745-3682
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Aug 2020

ID: 59663016