Fehring Thomas K, Odum Susan M, Fehring Keith, Springer Bryan D, Griffin William L, Dennos Anne C
OrthoCarolina Hip and Knee Center, Charlotte, North Carolina 28207, USA. thomas.fehring@ orthocarolina.com
Orthopedics. 2010 Oct 11;33(10):715. doi: 10.3928/01477447-20100826-03.
With the demand for total joint arthroplasty and overall life expectancy increasing, there will be an increase in the need for revision arthroplasty surgeries. Given that revision joint surgeries are more demanding for both surgeon and patient with longer operative times, increased blood loss, and multiple patient comorbidities, the current mindset is that older patients who undergo a total hip revision or total knee revision have higher mortality rates than younger patients. We identified 1737 revision total joint patients who were at least 2 years postoperative for inclusion in the study. The overall perioperative mortality rate (defined as deaths occurring between 0 and 3 months following revision joint surgery) was calculated and then stratified by revision knee surgery, revision hip surgery, and age. In addition, mortality rates were compared for patients younger than 70 years, between 70 and 80 years and older than 80 years. The overall perioperative mortality rate after revision total hip or knee surgery was 0.7%. After stratifying by age, the perioperative mortality rate was 0.2% in patients younger than 70 years, 0.8% in patients 70 to 79 years, and 2.63% in patients older than 80 years. Of the 1737 patients, 541 died >1 year following their revision surgery at an average time to death of 6.9 years. The observed perioperative mortality rates following revision total joint surgery at a single center were extremely low among all age groups. Therefore, the age of patients undergoing revision surgery should not be the sole determinant of perioperative survival. Additionally, it appears that the mean postoperative survival noted here seems to justify the additional resources used in revision surgery regardless of age. As limited resources exert pressure on an already overburdened healthcare system, rationing of care for certain procedures may ensue using age as a specific criteria. This study should add clarity to this issue.
随着全关节置换术需求的增加以及总体预期寿命的延长,翻修关节置换手术的需求也会上升。鉴于翻修关节手术对医生和患者的要求更高,手术时间更长、失血增多且患者存在多种合并症,目前的观念认为,接受全髋关节翻修或全膝关节翻修的老年患者死亡率高于年轻患者。我们纳入了1737例全关节翻修患者,这些患者术后至少已达2年。计算了总体围手术期死亡率(定义为翻修关节手术后0至3个月内发生的死亡),然后按膝关节翻修手术、髋关节翻修手术和年龄进行分层。此外,还比较了年龄小于70岁、70至80岁以及大于80岁患者的死亡率。全髋关节或膝关节翻修手术后的总体围手术期死亡率为0.7%。按年龄分层后,年龄小于70岁患者的围手术期死亡率为0.2%,70至79岁患者为0.8%,大于80岁患者为2.63%。在这1737例患者中,541例在翻修手术后1年以上死亡,平均死亡时间为6.9年。在单一中心,全关节翻修手术后各年龄组观察到的围手术期死亡率极低。因此,接受翻修手术患者的年龄不应成为围手术期生存的唯一决定因素。此外,此处记录的术后平均生存期似乎证明了无论年龄大小,翻修手术使用额外资源的合理性。由于有限的资源给本就负担过重的医疗系统带来压力,可能会以年龄作为特定标准对某些手术的医疗资源进行分配。本研究应能澄清这一问题。