title: Five-year results of the ASR XL Acetabular System and the ASR Hip Resurfacing System: an analysis from the Australian Orthopaedic Association National Joint Replacement Registry.
abstract: BACKGROUND
  Articular Surface Replacement (ASR) hip prostheses, which have metal-on-metal bearing surfaces, were manufactured by DePuy Orthopaedics (Warsaw, Indiana) for use in both conventional total hip arthroplasty and hip resurfacing. Both the ASR XL Acetabular System and the ASR Hip Resurfacing System were recently recalled worldwide by the manufacturer. This report summarizes an analysis by the Australian Orthopaedic Association National Joint Replacement Registry (AOANJRR) of the outcome of arthroplasties involving the ASR prostheses.
  
  
  METHODS
  The first recorded use of the ASR XL Acetabular System in Australia occurred in 2004, and the Registry recorded 4406 procedures involving this system through December 31, 2009. The first recorded use of the ASR Hip Resurfacing System in Australia occurred in 2003, and the Registry recorded 1167 procedures through December 31, 2009. The Kaplan-Meier method and proportional-hazard modeling were used to compare the revision rate of primary total hip arthroplasties involving the ASR XL Acetabular System with that of arthroplasties involving all other conventional prostheses as well as with that of arthroplasties involving all other conventional prostheses with a metal-on-metal-articulation. In addition, the revision rate of primary arthroplasties involving the ASR Hip Resurfacing System was compared with that of arthroplasties involving all other hip resurfacing prostheses. Patient demographics, prosthesis characteristics, and information regarding the type of revision and the reason for revision were also compared.
  
  
  RESULTS
  Arthroplasties involving both ASR designs had a significantly greater revision rate compared with those involving all other prostheses. The cumulative revision rate of arthroplasties involving the ASR XL Acetabular System at five years postoperatively was 9.3% (95% confidence interval [CI], 7.3% to 11.9%) compared with 3.4% (95% CI, 3.3% to 3.5%) for total hip arthroplasties involving all other conventional prostheses. The cumulative revision rate of arthroplasties involving the ASR Hip Resurfacing System at five years postoperatively was 10.9% (95% CI, 8.7% to 13.6%) compared with 4.0% (95% CI, 3.7% to 4.5%) for arthroplasties involving all other resurfacing prostheses. Arthroplasties involving the ASR XL Acetabular System had a greater rate of revision due to implant loosening and/or osteolysis and due to metal sensitivity compared with total hip arthroplasties involving all other conventional prostheses. Arthroplasties involving the ASR XL Acetabular System also had a significantly greater revision rate compared with total hip arthroplasties involving all other conventional metal-on-metal prostheses. Arthroplasties involving the ASR Hip Resurfacing System had a greater rate of revision due to metal sensitivity compared with total hip arthroplasties involving all other resurfacing prostheses.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  ASR prostheses used in conventional hip arthroplasty and in hip resurfacing exhibited a greater revision rate compared with other prostheses in the AOANJRR. These results are consistent with those derived from other registries and from published studies of individual cohorts.
authors.affiliation: Australian Orthopaedic Association National Joint Replacement Registry, Discipline of Public Health, University of Adelaide, Adelaide, SA, Australia. rdesteiger@aoanjrr.org.au
authors.forename: Richard N
authors.initials: RN
authors.lastname: de Steiger
authors.forename: Jacqueline R
authors.initials: JR
authors.lastname: Hang
authors.forename: Lisa N
authors.initials: LN
authors.lastname: Miller
authors.forename: Stephen E
authors.initials: SE
authors.lastname: Graves
authors.forename: David C
authors.initials: DC
authors.lastname: Davidson
mesh_terms: D019644:Arthroplasty, Replacement, Hip / Q000009:adverse effects / Q000379:methods*; D001315:Australia; D015331:Cohort Studies; D016001:Confidence Intervals; D005500:Follow-Up Studies; D006622:Hip Prosthesis; D006801:Humans; D053208:Kaplan-Meier Estimate; D008297:Male; D015207:Osteoarthritis, Hip / Q000000981:diagnostic imaging / Q000601:surgery*; D016016:Proportional Hazards Models; D011474:Prosthesis Design; D011475:Prosthesis Failure; D011859:Radiography; D012042:Registries; D012086:Reoperation / Q000706:statistics & numerical data; D012189:Retrospective Studies; D012955:Societies, Medical; D013997:Time Factors; D016896:Treatment Outcome