Alexander Klug1, Yves Gramlich2, Johannes Buckup2, Uwe Schweigkofler2, Reinhard Hoffmann2, Kay Schmidt-Horlohé2. 1. Investigation performed at BG Unfallklinik Frankfurt am Main, Friedberger Landstraße 430, 60389, Frankfurt am Main, Germany. alexander.klug@bgu-frankfurt.de. 2. Investigation performed at BG Unfallklinik Frankfurt am Main, Friedberger Landstraße 430, 60389, Frankfurt am Main, Germany.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To date, there has been no study investigating the epidemiology and the changes over time, especially regarding indications, in total elbow replacement in Germany. METHODS: Using German procedure classification system (OPS) codes as well as the associated ICD codes, a retrospective analysis from 2005 to 2014 of the data provided by the Federal Statistical Office of Germany was performed. Total elbow arthroplasties (TEAs) were evaluated for admitting diagnoses, sex, and age of patient and distribution of constraint versus unconstraint prostheses. Furthermore, the number and indications of revision elbow arthroplasty (REA) and explantations were identified. RESULTS: From 2005 to 2014, a total of 3872 patients underwent TEA in Germany. This represents a rise of 84% in this period. Almost 77% of the arthroplasties were performed in females, and over 45% were implanted in patients before the age of 70. During the study, a significant increase in TEA performed on patients for trauma from 12 to 42% and concomitantly, a decrease for the arthritis subgroup from 20 to 2.6% could be revealed. Additionally, almost a doubling of REA in that period could be detected (10.3 to 17.1%). The main revision indication could be found in mechanical complications, such as aseptic loosening (72.1%). Conversely, the number of explantations decreased (12.4 to 5.8%). CONCLUSION: During the study period, the number of TEA performed in Germany nearly doubled. Over the years, the most common indication for total elbow arthroplasty changed from inflammatory arthritis to trauma sequel. Further database analysis may help to identify populations at risk and specify reasons for revisions. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic Level IV.
PURPOSE: To date, there has been no study investigating the epidemiology and the changes over time, especially regarding indications, in total elbow replacement in Germany. METHODS: Using German procedure classification system (OPS) codes as well as the associated ICD codes, a retrospective analysis from 2005 to 2014 of the data provided by the Federal Statistical Office of Germany was performed. Total elbow arthroplasties (TEAs) were evaluated for admitting diagnoses, sex, and age of patient and distribution of constraint versus unconstraint prostheses. Furthermore, the number and indications of revision elbow arthroplasty (REA) and explantations were identified. RESULTS: From 2005 to 2014, a total of 3872 patients underwent TEA in Germany. This represents a rise of 84% in this period. Almost 77% of the arthroplasties were performed in females, and over 45% were implanted in patients before the age of 70. During the study, a significant increase in TEA performed on patients for trauma from 12 to 42% and concomitantly, a decrease for the arthritis subgroup from 20 to 2.6% could be revealed. Additionally, almost a doubling of REA in that period could be detected (10.3 to 17.1%). The main revision indication could be found in mechanical complications, such as aseptic loosening (72.1%). Conversely, the number of explantations decreased (12.4 to 5.8%). CONCLUSION: During the study period, the number of TEA performed in Germany nearly doubled. Over the years, the most common indication for total elbow arthroplasty changed from inflammatory arthritis to trauma sequel. Further database analysis may help to identify populations at risk and specify reasons for revisions. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic Level IV.
Entities:
Keywords:
Elbow; Epidemiology; Prosthesis; Revision arthroplasty; Total elbow arthroplasty
Authors: Alexander Ellwein; Helmut Lill; Christine Voigt; Pauline Wirtz; Gunnar Jensen; Jan Christoph Katthagen Journal: Int Orthop Date: 2014-12-23 Impact factor: 3.075
Authors: Michael D McKee; Christian J H Veillette; Jeremy A Hall; Emil H Schemitsch; Lisa M Wild; Robert McCormack; Bertrand Perey; Thomas Goetz; Mauri Zomar; Karyn Moon; Scott Mandel; Shirlet Petit; Pierre Guy; Irene Leung Journal: J Shoulder Elbow Surg Date: 2008-09-26 Impact factor: 3.019
Authors: L Obert; M Ferrier; A Jacquot; P Mansat; F Sirveaux; P Clavert; J-L Charissoux; L Pidhorz; T Fabre Journal: Orthop Traumatol Surg Res Date: 2013-10-30 Impact factor: 2.256
Authors: Mark A Frankle; Dolfi Herscovici; Thomas G DiPasquale; Matthew B Vasey; Roy W Sanders Journal: J Orthop Trauma Date: 2003-08 Impact factor: 2.512