Joint Registry Needed to Track Problem Hip and Knee Replacements
Sunday August 3, 2008
Joint replacements can fail for various reasons, one of which is a defective prosthesis. When this happens, patients may need a replacement of their replacement -- and certainly it would be best to alert surgeons as soon as possible that a specific prosthesis is defective. About 8 years ago, a hip implant that became contaminated during the manufacturing process was pulled from the market by Sulzer Orthopedics. As recently as last week, Zimmer suspended sales of its Durom cup until it trains surgeons how to best implant it, according to a report in the New York Times.
Other countries, including Australia, Britain, Norway and Sweden, track such problems swiftly by keeping a joint registry -- a database of all joint replacements. While a registry may not identify why a problem exists initially, it alerts surgeons not to continue implanting a device with a high failure rate. Other countries, through their joint registry, do this successfully and some experts believe it is needed in the United States. Others are critical of the idea claiming it would be difficult to get mandatory participation and thorough reporting. Read more about the pros and cons of a joint registry.
Related Resources:
- What Is Joint Replacement Surgery?
- Total Knee Replacement - What You Need to Know
- Total Hip Replacement - What You Need to Know
- More About the Durom Cup
Photo by Nikada (iStockphoto)
Comments
A mandatory joint registry would allow implant survivorship to be determined for each doctor. It would allow a 10-year survivorship number for all of a doctors hip and knee implants to be calculated. Survivorship meaning the number of implants still working in patients and not requiring a surgery to replace the original implant. Would you support putting a surgeons 10-year survivorship #’s for hip and knee replacements in their office waiting room? Similar to a cleanliness rating for restaurants, it would become possible for patients to see how well the surgeons implants are performing from a survivorship standpoint. What are your thoughts?
I think this is a wonderful and should be implemented right away. This would also give the potential patient info on what types of implants seem to work and last longer than others. Looks like my replacement only 11 months old according to my new doctor is needing a revision–semms to be mal-rotated–so he says.