JOA - 2026-04-17 - Journal Article
The Effects of Disease-Modifying Anti-Rheumatic Drugs on Total Hip Arthroplasty Outcomes in Patients Who Have Inflammatory Arthropathies.
Sheth N, Ross BJ, Hrudka B, Nezameslami A, Mathews D, Culley J, Wilson JM, Premkumar A
Topics
Key Takeaway
Biologic DMARD use—particularly IL-6 inhibitors (7.9% PJI) and anti-TNF agents (3.7%)—was associated with significantly higher PJI rates after primary THA compared to conventional DMARD users (2.1%) and non-DMARD controls (2.6%).
Summary Depth
Choose how much analysis to show on this article page.
Summary
This retrospective matched cohort study used a national claims database to compare 90-day complications and 2-year implant survivorship in inflammatory arthritis patients (RA, PsA, JIA) undergoing primary THA who were and were not on DMARD therapy. Propensity score matching controlled for demographics, comorbidities, and corticosteroid use. Biologic DMARD users had significantly higher PJI rates (3.9% vs. 2.6% controls, P=0.007), driven by IL-6 inhibitor users (7.9%) and anti-TNF users (3.7%), while conventional DMARD use conferred no significant increase in complications or aseptic revision.
Key Limitation
Claims data cannot verify actual perioperative DMARD withholding or resumption timing, meaning the observed PJI elevation may reflect non-adherence to withholding guidelines rather than an inherent drug effect.
Original Abstract
INTRODUCTION
Disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (DMARDs) are essential in managing inflammatory arthritides such as rheumatoid arthritis (RA), psoriatic arthritis (PsA), and juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA). As total hip arthroplasty (THA) and DMARD use become more common, it is unclear how DMARD use affects outcomes in this population. This study compared complications and implant survivorship after THA in patients who have inflammatory arthritis who had and did not have DMARD treatment.
METHODS
A retrospective matched cohort study was performed using a national claims database. Patients who had RA, PsA, or JIA undergoing primary THA from January 1, 2009, to December 31, 2020, were included. The DMARD users were identified by at least one prescription within 90 to 360 days preoperatively. Propensity score matching (1:1) was done based on demographics, comorbidities, and corticosteroid use. The 90-day complication rates and two-year implant survivorship were assessed. A total of 26,867 patients were identified, including 4,022 (15.0%) on DMARD therapy.
RESULTS
Survivorship from aseptic revision did not vary at two years between DMARD users and controls or among DMARD types. When stratified by type, biologic DMARD users exhibited a higher rate of periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) compared to both conventional DMARD users (3.9 versus 2.1%, P = 0.003) and controls (3.9 versus 2.6%; P = 0.007), which was predominantly driven by PJI rates for those on IL-6 inhibitors (7.9%) and anti-TNF medications (3.7%).
CONCLUSION
Conventional DMARD therapy was not associated with worse two-year outcomes, while biologic DMARD use was associated with reduced two-year implant survivorship due to septic revision. These findings underscore the importance of coordinated perioperative management in accordance with guidelines regarding DMARD use and highlight the need for collaboration between orthopaedic surgeons and rheumatologists. Further investigation is needed to determine whether the observed associations are driven by underlying immune dysregulation, specific DMARD effects, or unmeasured confounding.