Are all metal-on-metal hip revision operations contributing to the National Joint Registry implant survival curves? : a study comparing the London Implant Retrieval Centre and National Joint Registry datasets.
Sabah SA., Henckel J., Koutsouris S., Rajani R., Hothi H., Skinner JA., Hart AJ.
AimsThe National Joint Registry for England, Wales and Northern Ireland (NJR) has extended its scope to report on hospital, surgeon and implant performance. Data linkage of the NJR to the London Implant Retrieval Centre (LIRC) has previously evaluated data quality for hip primary procedures, but did not assess revision records.MethodsWe analysed metal-on-metal hip revision procedures performed between 2003 and 2013. A total of 69 929 revision procedures from the NJR and 929 revised pairs of components from the LIRC were included.ResultsWe were able to link 716 (77.1%) revision procedures on the NJR to the LIRC. This meant that 213 (22.9%) revision procedures at the LIRC could not be identified on the NJR. We found that 349 (37.6%) explants at the LIRC completed the full linkage process to both NJR primary and revision databases. Data completion was excellent (> 99.9%) for revision procedures reported to the NJR.DiscussionThis study has shown that only approximately one third of retrieved components at the LIRC, contributed to survival curves on the NJR. We recommend prospective registry-retrieval linkage as a tool to feedback missing and erroneous data to the NJR and improve data quality.Take home messageProspective Registry - retrieval linkage is a simple tool to evaluate and improve data quality on the NJR.