Produced on: Licenced for use until: Corail Stem (Standard Offset Collared)

Similar documents
Produced on: Licenced for use until: Corail Stem (Standard Offset Non-Collared)

Smith & Nephew. R3 Cementless Cup

Smith & Nephew. Polarstem Cementless

DePuy Corail Collared vs. Collarless (ex MoM)

DePuy Attune CR and Attune PS

DePuy Attune CR and Attune PS. Contents Recorded Usage in NJR Patient and Procedure Details Revision and Survivorship APPENDIX A Component List

REVISION. Zimmer Biomet All Trabecular Metal Cups vs. All non-tm cementless cups

DePuy Attune CR and Attune PS. Contents Recorded Usage in NJR Patient and Procedure Details Revision and Survivorship APPENDIX A Component List

PRIMARY. ConforMIS itotal G2 XE and itotal G2 (Bicondylar tray)

Automated Industry Report 824 Depuy Synthes Australia Attune PS Total Knee

Automated Industry Report 823 Depuy Synthes Australia Attune CR Total Knee

AOANJRR Automated Industry Report Depuy Synthes Australia Attune PS Total Knee Data Period: 1 September August 2018

National Joint Replacement Registry. Metal and Ceramic Bearing Surface in Total Conventional Hip Arthroplasty

2016 CELEBRATING 15 YEARS OF DATA REPORT NATIONAL JOINT REPLACEMENT REGISTRY. Metal and Ceramic Bearing Surface in Total Conventional Hip Arthroplasty

PUBLIC AND PATIENT GUIDE

PUBLIC AND PATIENT GUIDE TO THE NJR S 11TH ANNUAL REPORT 2014

)501( COPYRIGHT 2018 BY THE ARCHIVES OF BONE AND JOINT SURGERY

PUBLIC AND PATIENT GUIDE

National Joint Registry for England and Wales 3rd Annual Clinical Report

CORAIL Hip System. Clinical Summary

Acetabular Cup System. Clinical Summary

Scandinavian Journal of Surgery 103: 54 59, 2013

Are there limits for a cementless short hip stem?

Are You Living with. Hip Pain? MAKOplasty may be the right treatment option for you.

National Joint Replacement Registry. Outcomes of Classes No Longer Used Hip and Knee Arthroplasty SUPPLEMENTARY

BRITISH HIP SOCIETY. Annual Scientific Meeting 2019 Nottingham, Concert Hall. Registration from with Refreshments

PINNACLE Acetabular Cup System

Exeter. Designed for Anatomic Restoration. Clinical Evidence Education

Outcomes Following Total Hip Arthroplasty: A Review of the Registry Data

Scorpio NRG PS (cementless)/series 7000 (cementless) Total Knee Investigation

Optimizing function Maximizing survivorship Accelerating recovery

Gender Solutions Patello-Femoral Joint System

2:12-cv VAR-LJM Doc # 1 Filed 08/02/12 Pg 1 of 12 Pg ID 1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN

SUMMIT and DURALOC. Clinical Summary

DIRECT ANTERIOR APPROACH

AN ANALYSIS FROM THE NATIONAL JOINT REGISTRY FOR ENGLAND AND WALES

Impingement in THA. Georgi I. Wassilew. Orthopaedic Department, Centrum für Muskuloskeletale Chirurgie Univ.-Prof. Dr. med. C.

Bone Bangalore

Total Hip Replacement. Find out why the Anterior Approach may be right for you.

ESC. Enhanced Stability Liners. Design Rationale & Surgical Technique

BJR. Outcomes following revision surgery performed for adverse reactions to metal debris in non-metal-on-metal hip arthroplasty patients.

For Commercial products, please refer to the following policy: Preauthorization via Web-Based Tool for Procedures

Trusted technology. Trusted performance. Supporting healthcare professionals

Informed Consent for HRA

Move Ahead with Confidence. Hip Replacement Solutions from DePuy Orthopaedics

Appendix E-1 (Figures and Tables) Fig. E-1

National Joint Replacement Registry. Lay Summary 2015 Annual Report Hip and Knee Replacement

A RETROSPECTIVE COHORT STUDY OF MEDIUM-TERM DATA FROM A NATIONAL JOINT REGISTRY

SELF-CENTERING Bipolar/Modular Cathcart Unipolar

TITLE: Metal on Metal Total Hip Replacements or Hip Resurfacing for Adults: A Review of Clinical Effectiveness and Cost Effectiveness

NJR 2009 NJR Activity 2008 Keith Tucker Survivorship Analysis Martyn Porter Outliers Paul Gregg Clinician Feedback Peter Howard

Hip Resurfacing.

Functional Outcome following Primary and Revision Total Hip and Knee Replacement

Gerald Friedl 1 ; Roman Radl 1 ; Peter Rehak 2, Reingard Aigner 3, and Reinhard Windhager 1

Countrywise results of total hip replacement: An analysis of 438,733 hips based on the Nordic Arthroplasty Register Association database

Total Hip Replacement. Find out why Total Hip Replacement may be right for you.

JRI Thompson Hemiarthroplasty

Original Date: December 2015 Page 1 of 8 FOR CMS (MEDICARE) MEMBERS ONLY

ACETABULAR CUP SURGICAL TECHNIQUE

FDA Safety Communication: Metal-on- Metal Hip Implants

Shoulder Joint Replacement

Commissioning Policy Individual Funding Request

Raising Transparency of Pricing for Total Hip and Total Knee Replacements: A National Pilot on Value for Money for the NHS in Orthopaedic Procurement

National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence

2016 CELEBRATING 15 YEARS OF DATA REPORT NATIONAL JOINT REPLACEMENT REGISTRY. Outcomes of Classes No Longer Used Hip and Knee Arthroplasty

CeramTec Medical Products. BIOLOX DUO Ceramic Bipolar System. Bone-sparing joint reconstruction with a maximum range of motion

WHAT IS THE BEST BONE FIXATION TYPE? 2/11/2011

Orthopaedic Surgery. Elective Total Hip Replacement

Medical Products Division. BIOLOX DUO Ceramic Bipolar System. Bone-sparing joint reconstruction with a maximum range of motion

Informed Consent for HRA

DEPUY SYNTHES JOINT RECONSTRUCTION PATIENT EDUCATION SEMINAR

CORAIL HIP SYSTEM DESIGN RATIONALE

YOUR TOTAL HIP REPLACEMENT SURGERY STEPS TO RETURNING TO A LIFESTYLE YOU DESERVE

Robotic-Arm Assisted Surgery

YOUR TOTAL HIP REPLACEMENT SURGERY

Progeny Hip Stem. Surgical Protocol and Product Specifications

DENOMINATOR: All patient visits for patients aged 21 years and older with a diagnosis of OA

A radiographic comparison of femoral offset after cemented and cementless total hip arthroplasty

Developmental Dysplasia of the Hip Good Results of Later Total Hip Arthroplasty

R3 delta Ceramic Acetabular System PATIENT INFORMATION. Table of Contents

Furlong H-A.C. THR System

Bi-Polar 22.2mm & 28mm System - Operative technique

WHAT DO YOU THINK? 1. How many people in the United States undergo hip replacement surgery each year? a) 80,000. b) 330,000.

American Joint Replacement Registry. Jeffrey P. Knezovich, CAE Executive Director ---- Caryn D. Etkin, PhD, MPH Director of Analytics

CAUTION Federal law (USA) restricts this device to sale, by or on the order of a physician.

Optimum implant geometry

Durham Research Online

CAUTION: Ceramic liners are not approved for use in the United States.

SURGICAL TECHNIQUE CEMENTED & PRESS-FIT UNIFIED INSTRUMENTATION INTRAOPERATIVE FLEXIBILITY PROVEN BIOMECHANICS

3A ODEP rating, demonstrating 99.5% survivorship at 3 years for aseptic loosening

Totally Hip Preservation to Revision. Gothenburg, Sweden 29 March - 1 April 2017 WEDNESDAY 29 MARCH. Arrivals THURSDAY 30 MARCH

Many fields are derived from the existing NJR. John Timperley MB ChB FRCS (Ed) DPhil (Oxon) Vice President British Hip Society

WHAT YOU IS BACK WITHIN ARM S REACH

Map 48: Rate of metal-on-metal hip resurfacing procedures undertaken per population by PCT

A clinical and radiographic 13-year follow-up study of 138 Charnley hip arthroplasties in patients years old

J of Evolution of Med and Dent Sci/ eissn , pissn / Vol. 4/ Issue 22/ Mar 16, 2015 Page 3785

TriboFit Hip System. Issue 3 - August 2013 English

Total Hip Replacement

Transcription:

Implant Bespoke Report for: DePuy Comprising PRIMARY hips implanted up to: 09 October 2017 NJR Database extract: 08 December 2017 Produced on: Licenced for use until: 29 December 2017 29 April 2018 Contents Recorded Usage in NJR Patient and Procedure Details Patient Reported Outcome Measures APPENDIX A Component List 2 3 4 12 15 This report has been produced by the National Joint Registry of England, Wales and Northern Ireland (NJR). It summarises usage and outcomes associated with the, based on data collected by the NJR up to the specified date, for the following combinations of products: Femoral components Acetabular Components Any Acetabular Components from all manufacturers Appendix A lists details of all components included in this report. This report is subject to the National Joint Registry Supplier Feedback Terms and Conditions Use. In particular, this analysis must not be released to any third party, unless directly employed by the Supplier, without written permission of the the Healthcare Quality Improvement Partnership, with the exception of submissions to regulatory bodies Page 1

2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 Bespoke Report for: Implant Usage Date of first recorded usage in the NJR: Date of last recorded usage in this dataset: Maximum implantation time: Mean implantation time: 05 June 2003 09 October 2017 14.3 years 3.9 years NJR Recorded Usage Totals Recorded in NJR Procedures Cumulative Total 65,545 Patients 59,709 Centres 294 Consultants 1,004 Implanting Surgeons 1,662 70000 60000 50000 Cumulative Procedures 1800 1600 1400 1200 Cumulative Surgeons and Centres 40000 1000 30000 800 20000 10000 600 400 200 0 0 Procedures Centres Consultants Implanting Surgeons Current Outcome Pre- 2006 Year of implantation 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Total % Death 141 181 355 557 653 664 637 479 406 337 227 106 20 4763 7.3% Revised 51 42 119 179 171 103 94 106 78 81 98 68 28 1218 1.9% Unrevised 381 583 1060 1789 2914 3808 4683 5738 6261 7504 8552 9148 7143 59564 90.9% Total 573 806 1534 2525 3738 4575 5414 6323 6745 7922 8877 9322 7191 65545 100% Page 2

Bespoke Report for: Patient / Procedure Details Patient Details All NJR Cementless Stems All NJR hip replacement Total Procedures 65,545 395,274 967,957 Total Patients 59,709 345,121 829,519 Demographics Mean age 67.8 65.4 68.5 < 50 5.7% 8.3% 6.0% 50 59 15.2% 18.7% 13.7% 60 69 32.7% 35.2% 29.5% 70 79 32.9% 28.5% 34.4% 80 13.7% 9.3% 16.3% Median BMI 28 28 28 % BMI information available 65.3% 60.4% 57.7% Underweight ( BMI < 18.5) 0.8% 0.7% 0.9% Normal (18.5 BMI < 25) 20.6% 19.0% 20.9% Overweight (25 BMI < 30) 38.6% 39.4% 39.8% Obese I (30 BMI < 35) 25.6% 26.6% 25.6% Obese II (35 BMI < 40) 10.6% 10.6% 9.6% Obese III (BMI 40) 3.7% 3.7% 3.3% % Male 34.2% 43.9% 40.1% ASA Grades P1 - Fit and healthy 15.2% 18.9% 16.7% P2 - Mild disease not incapacitating 70.5% 68.5% 67.6% P3 - Incapacitating systemic disease 13.9% 12.2% 15.1% P4 / P5 0.5% 0.4% 0.6% Indications Osteoarthritis 93.00% 93.09% 92.00% Rheumatoid Arthritis 1.19% 1.22% 1.32% Avascular Necrosis 1.99% 2.60% 2.51% Fractured Neck of Femur 3.08% 1.76% 2.92% CDH/DDH 1.31% 2.01% 1.54% Other 1.24% 1.84% 2.14% Total of indications may exceed total number of implants, since more than one indication can be listed per case. Page 3

Bespoke Report for: Reasons for Revision - All bearing types Reasons for revision of primary procedures in which the implant was used. Reason for Revision Revised Expected Revisions * p value Pain 195 248.33 <0.001 Dislocation / Subluxation 221 275.81 <0.001 Adverse Soft Tissue Reaction 249 261.79 0.436 Infection 182 204.26 0.099 Aseptic Loosening - Stem 182 234.93 <0.001 Aseptic Loosening - Socket 91 146.92 <0.001 Periprosthetic Fracture Stem 70 199.44 <0.001 Periprosthetic Fracture Socket 10 29.82 <0.001 Malalignment Stem 40 51.88 0.084 Malalignment Socket 86 94.34 0.377 Wear Of Acetabular Component 66 66.62 1 Lysis Stem 25 35.37 0.076 Lysis Socket 19 33.11 0.008 Implant Fracture Stem 9 21.19 0.003 Implant Fracture Socket 30 25.47 0.341 Implant Fracture Head 3 6.64 0.157 Dissociation of Liner 35 31.15 0.442 Other / reason not recorded 72 100.04 0.002 Total Revised 1218 1588.66 <0.001 * Based on All NJR Cementless Stems adjusted for agegroup, multiple reasons may be listed for one revision procedure gender, and indications Significantly better, p < 0.001 Significantly better, p < 0.05 Significantly worse p < 0.05 Significantly worse p < 0.001 Components Revised Number of procedures All other Cementless Stems in NJR Femoral only 208 17% 23% Acetabular only 459 38% 36% Both femoral and acetabular 372 31% 33% Neither femoral nor acetabular revision recorded * 179 15% 9% * includes isolated head and/or liner exchange Page 4

Bespoke Report for: Reasons for Revision - excluding Metal on Metal Reasons for revision of non-mom primary procedures in which the implant was used. Reason for Revision Revised Expected Revisions * p value Pain 80 144.49 <0.001 Dislocation / Subluxation 196 249.27 <0.001 Adverse Soft Tissue Reaction 32 37.45 0.387 Infection 154 169.99 0.2 Aseptic Loosening - Stem 142 189.17 <0.001 Aseptic Loosening - Socket 72 97.61 0.005 Periprosthetic Fracture Stem 54 179.75 <0.001 Periprosthetic Fracture Socket 10 27.64 <0.001 Malalignment Stem 34 45.10 0.076 Malalignment Socket 62 76.00 0.084 Wear Of Acetabular Component 45 52.85 0.274 Lysis Stem 15 19.89 0.287 Lysis Socket 16 15.47 0.893 Implant Fracture Stem 7 17.78 0.005 Implant Fracture Socket 30 25.07 0.286 Implant Fracture Head 3 6.41 0.211 Dissociation of Liner 30 28.06 0.684 Other / reason not recorded 47 64.14 0.021 Total Revised 817 1133.22 <0.001 * Based on All NJR Cementless Stems (excluding metal on multiple reasons may be listed for one revision procedure metal), adjusted for agegroup, gender, and indications Significantly better, p < 0.001 Significantly better, p < 0.05 Significantly worse p < 0.05 Significantly worse p < 0.001 Number of All other Cementless Stems Components Revised procedures in NJR Femoral only 174 21% 29% Acetabular only 249 30% 28% Both femoral and acetabular 270 33% 32% Neither femoral nor acetabular revision recorded * 124 15% 11% Page 5

Cumulative Revision Rate Bespoke Report for: Cumulative Revision Rate Endpoint: All reasons for revision. All Bearing types 9.0% 8.0% 7.0% 6.0% 5.0% 4.0% 3.0% 2.0% 1.0% 0.0% 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 Implantation time / years 95% confidence interval 95% confidence interval All other Cementless Stems in NJR Cox Proportional Hazards model for revision risk ratio of / All other Cementless Stems in NJR, with endpoint as any revision. Adjustment Hazard Ratio (95% CI) p- value All bearings. Unadjusted. 0.71 (0.67-0.75) <0.001 All bearings. Adjusted for age, gender, 0.80 year cohort and indications. (0.76-0.85) <0.001 Hazard ratio varies with time Page 6

Cumulative Revision Rate Bespoke Report for: Cumulative Revision Rate 7.0% Endpoint: All reasons for revision. Excluding Metal-on-Metal 6.0% 5.0% 4.0% 3.0% 2.0% 1.0% 0.0% 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 Implantation time / years 95% confidence interval 95% confidence interval All other Cementless Stems in NJR Cox Proportional Hazards model for revision risk ratio of / All other Cementless Stems in NJR, with endpoint as any revision. Adjustment Hazard Ratio (95% CI) p- value Excluding MoM, Unadjusted. 0.67 (0.63-0.72) <0.001 Excluding MoM. Adjusted for age, 0.71 gender, year cohort and indications. (0.66-0.76) <0.001 Hazard ratio varies with time Page 7

Cumulative Revision Rate Bespoke Report for: Cumulative Revision Rate Endpoint: Femoral Revision. All Bearing types 4.5% 4.0% 3.5% 3.0% 2.5% 2.0% 1.5% 1.0% 0.5% 0.0% 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 Implantation time / years 95% confidence interval 95% confidence interval All other Cementless Stems in NJR Cox Proportional Hazards model for revision risk ratio of / all other All other Cementless Stems in NJR, with endpoint as Femoral revision. Adjustment Hazard Ratio (95% CI) p- value All bearings. Unadjusted. 0.60 (0.55-0.65) <0.001 All bearings. Adjusted for age, gender, 0.65 year cohort and indications. (0.60-0.71) <0.001 Hazard ratio varies with time Page 8

Cumulative Revision Rate Bespoke Report for: Cumulative Revision Rate 3.5% Endpoint: Femoral Revision. Excluding Metal-on-Metal 3.0% 2.5% 2.0% 1.5% 1.0% 0.5% 0.0% 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 Implantation time / years 95% confidence interval 95% confidence interval All other Cementless Stems in NJR Cox Proportional Hazards model for revision risk ratio of / All other Cementless Stems in NJR, with endpoint as Femoral revision. Adjustment Hazard Ratio (95% CI) p- value Excluding MoM, Unadjusted 0.57 (0.52-0.63) <0.001 Excluding MoM. Adjusted for age, 0.60 gender, year cohort and indications. (0.54-0.66) <0.001 Hazard ratio varies with time Page 9

Bespoke Report for: Cumulative Revision Rate Endpoint: All revisions All Bearing types Excluding Metal on Metal Bearings Period /years At Risk All NJR Cementless Stems All THR At Risk All NJR Cementless Stems All THR 0 65,545 - - - 62,047 - - - 1 55,250 0.6% (0.5% - 0.6%) 1.0% (0.9% - 1.0%) 0.8% (0.8% - 0.8%) 51,832 0.6% (0.5% - 0.6%) 1.0% (0.9% - 1.0%) 0.7% (0.7% - 0.8%) 2 45,392 1.0% (0.9% - 1.0%) 1.4% (1.4% - 1.5%) 1.2% (1.1% - 1.2%) 42,057 0.9% (0.8% - 1.0%) 1.4% (1.3% - 1.4%) 1.1% (1.1% - 1.1%) 3 36,266 1.3% (1.2% - 1.4%) 1.9% (1.8% - 1.9%) 1.5% (1.5% - 1.6%) 33,038 1.2% (1.1% - 1.3%) 1.7% (1.7% - 1.8%) 1.4% (1.4% - 1.4%) 4 28,184 1.7% (1.6% - 1.9%) 2.3% (2.3% - 2.4%) 1.9% (1.9% - 1.9%) 25,092 1.4% (1.3% - 1.6%) 2.0% (1.9% - 2.0%) 1.6% (1.6% - 1.7%) 5 21,466 2.2% (2.0% - 2.3%) 2.9% (2.8% - 2.9%) 2.4% (2.3% - 2.4%) 18,519 1.6% (1.5% - 1.8%) 2.3% (2.2% - 2.3%) 1.9% (1.9% - 1.9%) 6 15,312 2.7% (2.5% - 2.9%) 3.5% (3.4% - 3.5%) 2.8% (2.8% - 2.9%) 12,522 1.9% (1.8% - 2.1%) 2.5% (2.5% - 2.6%) 2.1% (2.1% - 2.2%) 7 10,290 3.2% (3.0% - 3.4%) 4.1% (4.0% - 4.2%) 3.4% (3.3% - 3.4%) 7,721 2.1% (2.0% - 2.3%) 2.8% (2.8% - 2.9%) 2.4% (2.4% - 2.5%) 8 6,364 3.8% (3.5% - 4.0%) 4.9% (4.8% - 5.0%) 3.9% (3.9% - 4.0%) 4,336 2.4% (2.2% - 2.6%) 3.2% (3.1% - 3.2%) 2.7% (2.7% - 2.8%) 9 3,454 4.3% (4.0% - 4.7%) 5.6% (5.5% - 5.7%) 4.5% (4.4% - 4.5%) 2,165 2.5% (2.3% - 2.8%) 3.5% (3.4% - 3.6%) 3.1% (3.0% - 3.1%) 10 1,816 5.0% (4.5% - 5.4%) 6.4% (6.2% - 6.5%) 5.1% (5.0% - 5.1%) 1,153 2.7% (2.4% - 3.1%) 3.9% (3.8% - 4.0%) 3.4% (3.4% - 3.5%) 11 857 5.5% (5.0% - 6.1%) 7.0% (6.8% - 7.1%) 5.6% (5.5% - 5.7%) 586 2.8% (2.5% - 3.4%) 4.4% (4.2% - 4.5%) 3.9% (3.8% - 4.0%) 12 275 5.9% (5.1% - 6.8%) 7.6% (7.4% - 7.8%) 6.2% (6.1% - 6.3%) 212 3.3% (2.6% - 4.3%) 4.9% (4.7% - 5.0%) 4.3% (4.2% - 4.4%) 13 ( - ) 8.2% (8.0% - 8.5%) 6.7% (6.6% - 6.8%) ( - ) 5.4% (5.2% - 5.7%) 4.8% (4.7% - 4.9%) 14 ( - ) 9.0% (8.5% - 9.4%) 7.3% (7.1% - 7.5%) ( - ) 6.2% (5.7% - 6.7%) 5.4% (5.2% - 5.6%) 15 ( - ) ( - ) ( - ) ( - ) ( - ) ( - ) Cumulative revision rate with 95% confidence intervals Rate is only reported for times where more than 40 remain at risk Page 10

Bespoke Report for: Cumulative Revision Rate Endpoint: Femoral Revision All Bearing types Excluding Metal on Metal Bearings Period /years At Risk All NJR Cementless Stems All THR At Risk All NJR Cementless Stems All THR 0 65,545 - - - 62,047 - - - 1 55,250 0.3% (0.3% - 0.3%) 0.6% (0.6% - 0.6%) 0.5% (0.5% - 0.5%) 51,832 0.3% (0.3% - 0.3%) 0.6% (0.6% - 0.6%) 0.5% (0.5% - 0.5%) 2 45,392 0.5% (0.5% - 0.6%) 0.9% (0.9% - 0.9%) 0.8% (0.8% - 0.8%) 42,057 0.5% (0.5% - 0.6%) 0.9% (0.8% - 0.9%) 0.7% (0.7% - 0.7%) 3 36,266 0.7% (0.6% - 0.8%) 1.1% (1.1% - 1.2%) 1.0% (1.0% - 1.0%) 33,038 0.7% (0.6% - 0.7%) 1.1% (1.1% - 1.1%) 0.9% (0.9% - 0.9%) 4 28,184 0.9% (0.8% - 1.0%) 1.4% (1.3% - 1.4%) 1.3% (1.2% - 1.3%) 25,092 0.8% (0.7% - 0.9%) 1.3% (1.2% - 1.3%) 1.1% (1.0% - 1.1%) 5 21,466 1.0% (0.9% - 1.1%) 1.6% (1.6% - 1.7%) 1.5% (1.5% - 1.6%) 18,519 0.9% (0.8% - 1.0%) 1.4% (1.4% - 1.5%) 1.2% (1.2% - 1.3%) 6 15,312 1.3% (1.1% - 1.4%) 1.9% (1.9% - 2.0%) 1.9% (1.8% - 1.9%) 12,522 1.0% (0.9% - 1.2%) 1.6% (1.6% - 1.7%) 1.4% (1.4% - 1.4%) 7 10,290 1.5% (1.3% - 1.6%) 2.2% (2.1% - 2.3%) 2.2% (2.2% - 2.2%) 7,721 1.2% (1.0% - 1.3%) 1.8% (1.7% - 1.8%) 1.6% (1.6% - 1.6%) 8 6,364 1.7% (1.5% - 1.9%) 2.5% (2.5% - 2.6%) 2.6% (2.5% - 2.6%) 4,336 1.3% (1.2% - 1.5%) 2.0% (1.9% - 2.0%) 1.8% (1.8% - 1.9%) 9 3,454 1.9% (1.7% - 2.1%) 2.9% (2.8% - 2.9%) 2.9% (2.9% - 3.0%) 2,165 1.4% (1.2% - 1.6%) 2.2% (2.1% - 2.3%) 2.0% (2.0% - 2.1%) 10 1,816 2.2% (1.9% - 2.5%) 3.2% (3.1% - 3.3%) 3.3% (3.3% - 3.4%) 1,153 1.4% (1.2% - 1.7%) 2.4% (2.3% - 2.5%) 2.3% (2.3% - 2.4%) 11 857 2.3% (2.0% - 2.7%) 3.6% (3.4% - 3.7%) 3.7% (3.7% - 3.8%) 586 1.5% (1.3% - 1.9%) 2.7% (2.6% - 2.8%) 2.6% (2.5% - 2.7%) 12 275 2.3% (2.0% - 3.1%) 3.9% (3.7% - 4.0%) 4.1% (4.1% - 4.2%) 212 1.5% (1.3% - 2.2%) 2.9% (2.8% - 3.1%) 2.9% (2.8% - 3.0%) 13 ( - ) 4.3% (4.1% - 4.5%) 4.6% (4.5% - 4.7%) ( - ) 3.3% (3.1% - 3.5%) 3.3% (3.2% - 3.4%) 14 ( - ) 4.6% (4.3% - 4.9%) 5.0% (4.8% - 5.2%) ( - ) 3.6% (3.3% - 4.0%) 3.6% (3.4% - 3.8%) 15 ( - ) ( - ) ( - ) ( - ) ( - ) ( - ) Cumulative revision rate with 95% confidence intervals Rate is only reported for times where more than 40 remain at risk Page 11

Bespoke Report for: Patient Reported Outcomes PROMs Analysis Comprising PROMs data up to and including: 30/12/2014 Measure Product Group Pre-Op Records Mean Pre-Op Score 6-month records Mean 6 month Score Health Gain Improved Unchanged / Worsened Oxford Hip Score (0-48) All NJR Cementless Stems EQ-5D Index (-0.59-1.00) All NJR Cementless Stems EQ-VAS (0-100) All NJR Cementless Stems Page 12

Insufficient data Insufficient data Bespoke Report for: Responses are not case mix adjusted Patient Reported Outcomes Success Satisfaction 100% 100% 90% 90% 80% 80% 70% 70% 60% Much worse 60% Poor 50% A little worse 50% Fair 40% 30% 20% About the same A little better Much better 40% 30% 20% Good Very Good Excellent 10% 10% 0% All other Cementless Stems in NJR 0% All other Cementless Stems in NJR Chi-squared p-value for difference: Insufficient data Answer to 6-months general health question: Overall, how are your problems now, compared to before your operation? Chi-squared p-value for difference: Insufficient data Answer to 6-months general health question: How would you describe the results of your operation? Page 13

Bespoke Report for: Disclaimer Disclaimer The National Joint Registry (NJR) produces this report through its contractor, Northgate Public Services (UK) Limited (NPS) using data collected, collated and provided by third parties. As a result, neither NJR or NPS takes any responsibility for the accuracy, currency, reliability and correctness of any data used or referred to in this report, and disclaims all warranties in relation to such data, in each case to the maximum extent permitted by legislation. To the maximum extent permitted by law, neither the NJR or NPS shall have any liability (including but not limited to liability by reason of negligence) for any loss, damage, cost or expense incurred or arising by reason of any person using or relying on the data within this report and whether caused by reason of any error, omission or misrepresentation in the report or otherwise. This report is not to be taken as advice. Third parties using or relying on the data in this report do so at their own risk and will be responsible for making their own assessment and should verify all relevant representations, statements and information with their own professional advisers. Page 14

Catalogue Number Description Number Implanted 3L92498 Corail Collared Stem K8A 115mm 3,664 3L92499 Corail Collared Stem K9A 130mm 5,862 3L92500 Corail Collared Stem K10A 140mm 11,814 3L92501 Corail Collared Stem K11A 145mm 17,210 3L92502 Corail Collared Stem K12A 150mm 14,034 3L92503 Corail Collared Stem K13A 155mm 6,887 3L92504 Corail Collared Stem K14A 160mm 3,573 3L92505 Corail Collared Stem K15A 165mm 1,705 3L92506 Corail Collared Stem K16A 170mm 644 3L92508 Corail Collared Stem K18A 180mm 140 3L92521 Corail Collared Stem K20A 190mm 12 DSUS/JRC/0218/2592 Page 15