Why hip implants fail: Patient, surgeon, or device?

In the Registry Era, in the Information Age, and with a competitive and expanding marketplace, the focus has been on the prosthetic joint devices. However, a distinction should be made between mechanical failure of a device, failure of an arthroplasty, and the limitations of technology. The patient and the surgeon play central roles in the majority of revisions (failure of an arthroplasty). Analysis of a large United States database indicates that the most common causes of revision are instability/dislocation (22.5%), mechanical loosening (19.7%), and infection (14.8%). Acetabular component position has been linked to higher wear and instability. Increased odds of component mal-position were found with lower-volume surgeons and patients with a higher body mass index. Medical co-morbidities significantly increase the risk for revision within 12 months of surgery. Patient demographics and pre-operative status have been shown to be more important than implant factors in predicting the presence of thigh pain, dissatisfaction, and a low hip score. The most predictive factors were ethnicity, educational level, poverty level, income, and a low pre-operative WOMAC score or pre-operative SF-12 mental component score.