PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to develop a more accurate method to deal with patients lost to follow-up based on the competing risks approach. METHODS: A cohort of 112 patients who received 143 primary cemented total knee arthroplasties forms the basis for this study. Follow-up was up to 25 years. The new method for dealing with lost to follow-up accounts for competing events (i.e. death and failure of a prosthesis) using the cumulative incidence estimator and estimates time to event for patients lost to follow-up using national demographic registries. The results of this new method were compared with the worst case scenario estimated by Kaplan-Meier. RESULTS: Six different situations were identified covering all possible situations in long-term follow-up for total knee arthroplasty. The new method--considering all patients lost to follow-up as revised--showed a twofold reduction in revision rate compared to the traditional worst case scenario using Kaplan-Meier. CONCLUSIONS: Lost to follow-up should be prevented whenever possible, but this may be unavoidable for long-term follow-up studies. In situations where lost to follow-up does occur, the new proposed method offers an efficient and valid approach to deal with this problem.
PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to develop a more accurate method to deal with patients lost to follow-up based on the competing risks approach. METHODS: A cohort of 112 patients who received 143 primary cemented total knee arthroplasties forms the basis for this study. Follow-up was up to 25 years. The new method for dealing with lost to follow-up accounts for competing events (i.e. death and failure of a prosthesis) using the cumulative incidence estimator and estimates time to event for patients lost to follow-up using national demographic registries. The results of this new method were compared with the worst case scenario estimated by Kaplan-Meier. RESULTS: Six different situations were identified covering all possible situations in long-term follow-up for total knee arthroplasty. The new method--considering all patients lost to follow-up as revised--showed a twofold reduction in revision rate compared to the traditional worst case scenario using Kaplan-Meier. CONCLUSIONS: Lost to follow-up should be prevented whenever possible, but this may be unavoidable for long-term follow-up studies. In situations where lost to follow-up does occur, the new proposed method offers an efficient and valid approach to deal with this problem.
Authors: R Peto; M C Pike; P Armitage; N E Breslow; D R Cox; S V Howard; N Mantel; K McPherson; J Peto; P G Smith Journal: Br J Cancer Date: 1977-01 Impact factor: 7.640
Authors: Martijn A J te Stroet; Sushma A Ghisai; J Christiaan Keurentjes; Wim H C Rijnen; Jean W M Gardeniers; Albert Van Kampen; B Willem Schreurs Journal: Int Orthop Date: 2015-04-12 Impact factor: 3.075
Authors: Wiebe C Verra; Lennard G H van den Boom; Wilco C H Jacobs; Jan W Schoones; Ate B Wymenga; Rob G H H Nelissen Journal: Acta Orthop Date: 2014-10-17 Impact factor: 3.717
Authors: J C Keurentjes; F R Van Tol; M Fiocco; C So-Osman; R Onstenk; A W M M Koopman-Van Gemert; R G Pöll; R G H H Nelissen Journal: Bone Joint Res Date: 2014-01-13 Impact factor: 5.853