Assessing the non-inferiority of prosthesis constructs used in total and unicondylar knee replacements using data from the National Joint Registry of England, Wales, Northern Ireland and the Isle of Man: A benchmarking study

Kevin Deere, Michael Whitehouse, Martyn L. Porter, Ashley Blom, Adrian Sayers*

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle (Academic Journal)peer-review

6 Citations (Scopus)
198 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

Objectives: To investigate the relative performance of knee replacement constructs compared with the best performing construct and illustrate the substantial variability in performance. Design: A non-inferiority study. Setting: England and Wales. Participants: All primary total and unicondylar knee replacements performed and registered in the National Joint Registry between 1 April 2003 and 31 December 2016. Main outcome measures: Kaplan-Meier failure function for knee replacement constructs. Failure difference between best performing construct (the benchmark) and other constructs. Methods: Using a non-inferiority analysis, the performance of knee replacement constructs by brand were compared with the best performing construct. Construct failure was estimated using the 1-Kaplan Meier method, that is, an estimate of net failure. The difference in failure between the contemporary benchmark construct and all other constructs were tested. Results: Of the 449 different knee replacement constructs used, only 27 had ≥500 procedures at risk at 10 years postprimary, 18 of which were classified as inferior to the benchmark by at least 20% relative risk of failure. Two of these 18 were unicondylar constructs that were inferior by at least 100% relative risk. In men, aged 55-75 years, 12 of 27 (44%) constructs were inferior by at least 20% to the benchmark at 7 years postprimary. In women, aged 55-75 years, 8 of 32 (25%) constructs were inferior at 7 years postprimary. Very few constructs were classified as non-inferior to the contemporary benchmark. Conclusions: There are few knee replacement constructs that can be shown to be non-inferior to a contemporary benchmark. Unicondylar knee constructs have, almost universally, at least 100% worse revision outcomes compared with the best performing total knee replacement. These results will help to inform patients, clinicians and commissioners when considering knee replacement surgery.

Original languageEnglish
Article numbere026736
Pages (from-to)e026736
Number of pages14
JournalBMJ Open
Volume9
Issue number4
Early online date30 Apr 2019
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Apr 2019

Bibliographical note

© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2019. Re-use permitted under CC BY. Published by BMJ.

Structured keywords

  • Centre for Surgical Research

Keywords

  • benchmarking
  • knee arthroplasty
  • medical devices
  • national joint registry
  • non-inferiority

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'Assessing the non-inferiority of prosthesis constructs used in total and unicondylar knee replacements using data from the National Joint Registry of England, Wales, Northern Ireland and the Isle of Man: A benchmarking study'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this