Read more

March 27, 2024
1 min read
Save

Elevated BMI may not increase risks of dislocation, revision after THA

You've successfully added to your alerts. You will receive an email when new content is published.

Click Here to Manage Email Alerts

We were unable to process your request. Please try again later. If you continue to have this issue please contact customerservice@slackinc.com.

Key takeaways:

  • Elevated BMI had no association with increased risks of dislocation or revision after total hip arthroplasty.
  • Dislocation and revision were similar between patients with high BMI vs. normal BMI.
Perspective from Charles P. Hannon, MD, MBA

Published results showed patients with a higher BMI had no differences in rates of dislocation or revision at 1 year to 2 years after primary total hip arthroplasty compared with patients with a normal BMI.

“When controlling for established risk factors for instability, obesity in isolation did not impact dislocation risk,” study co-author Alexander J. Acuña, MD, told Healio. “This suggests that surgeons should consider patients’ individual dislocation risk profiles rather than strict BMI cut-offs when indicating patients for THA and making decisions regarding implants or approach. This should include each patient’s unique comorbidity burden, surgical history, activity level and anatomy,” he added.

Hip replacement
Elevated BMI had no association with increased risks of dislocation or revision after THA. Image: Adobe Stock

Acuña and colleagues from Rush University Medical Center retrospectively analyzed data from 8,931 patients who underwent elective primary THA for osteoarthritis between 2010 and 2022.

Alexander J. Acuña
Alexander J. Acuña

Researchers categorized patients into cohorts based on whether they had a BMI of 25 kg/m2 to 29.9 kg/m2 (n=2,313); 30 kg/m2 to 34.9 kg/m2 (n= 2,230); 35 kg/m2 to 39.9 kg/m2 (n=1,852); 40 kg/m2 to 44.9 kg/m2 (n=1,450); 45 kg/m2 to 49.9 kg/m2 (n=752); or 50 kg/m2 to 59.9 kg/m2 (n=334). Cohorts were matched 1:1 with a control cohort of patients with a normal BMI of 20 kg/m2 to 24.9 kg/m2.

According to the study, outcome measures included dislocation rates at 30 days, 90 days, 6 months, 1 year and 2 years, as well as revision rates at 1 year and 2 years.

Overall, Acuña and colleagues found no significant differences in dislocation rates or revision rates between patients with elevated BMI vs. patients with normal BMI at all postoperative follow-up intervals.

They noted dislocation rates increased from 0.73% for patients with BMI between 25 kg/m2 and 29.9 kg/m2 to 1.2% for patients with BMI between 50 kg/m2 and 59.9 kg/m2 at 30-day follow-up.

They also noted patients with a BMI between 45 kg/m2 and 49.9 kg/m2 as well as controls matched to patients with a BMI between 50 kg/m2 and 59.9 kg/m2 had the highest revision rates for instability at 2-year follow-up.

“Our findings encourage additional research to evaluate how uncontrollable factors, such as implant selection (dual mobility vs. larger head), the use of intraoperative technology and each patient’s spinopelvic alignment may impact dislocation risk in patients with instability risk factors regardless of BMI,” Acuña concluded.