Literature DB >> 24418635

Failure rate of cemented and uncemented total hip replacements: register study of combined Nordic database of four nations.

Keijo T Mäkelä1, Markus Matilainen, Pekka Pulkkinen, Anne M Fenstad, Leif Havelin, Lars Engesaeter, Ove Furnes, Alma B Pedersen, Søren Overgaard, Johan Kärrholm, Henrik Malchau, Göran Garellick, Jonas Ranstam, Antti Eskelinen.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To assess the failure rate of cemented, uncemented, hybrid, and reverse hybrid total hip replacements in patients aged 55 years or older.
DESIGN: Register study.
SETTING: Nordic Arthroplasty Register Association database (combined data from Sweden, Norway, Denmark, and Finland). PARTICIPANTS: 347,899 total hip replacements performed during 1995-2011. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Probability of implant survival (Kaplan-Meier analysis) along with implant survival with revision for any reason as endpoint (Cox multiple regression) adjusted for age, sex, and diagnosis in age groups 55-64, 65-74, and 75 years or older.
RESULTS: The proportion of total hip replacements using uncemented implants increased rapidly towards the end of the study period. The 10 year survival of cemented implants in patients aged 65 to 74 and 75 or older (93.8%, 95% confidence interval 93.6% to 94.0% and 95.9%, 95.8% to 96.1%, respectively) was higher than that of uncemented (92.9%, 92.3% to 93.4% and 93.0%, 91.8% to 94.0%), hybrid (91.6%, 90.9% to 92.2% and 93.9%, 93.1% to 94.5%), and reverse hybrid (90.7%, 87.3% to 93.2% and 93.2%, 90.7% to 95.1%) implants. The survival of cemented (92.2%, 91.8% to 92.5%) and uncemented (91.8%, 91.3% to 92.2%) implants in patients aged 55 to 64 was similar. During the first six months the risk of revision with cemented implants was lower than with all other types of fixation in all age groups.
CONCLUSION: The survival of cemented implants for total hip replacement was higher than that of uncemented implants in patients aged 65 years or older. The increased use of uncemented implants in this age group is not supported by these data. However, because our dataset includes only basic information common to all national registers there is potential for residual confounding.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 24418635     DOI: 10.1136/bmj.f7592

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  BMJ        ISSN: 0959-8138


  61 in total

1.  CORR Insights(®): Do Rerevision Rates Differ After First-time Revision of Primary THA With a Cemented and Cementless Femoral Component?

Authors:  Ola Rolfson
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2015-04-17       Impact factor: 4.176

2.  Multinational comprehensive evaluation of the fixation method used in hip replacement: interaction with age in context.

Authors:  Susanna Stea; Thomas Comfort; Art Sedrakyan; Leif Havelin; Marcella Marinelli; Thomas Barber; Elizabeth Paxton; Samprit Banerjee; Abby J Isaacs; Stephen Graves
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am       Date:  2014-12-17       Impact factor: 5.284

3.  National and international postmarket research and surveillance implementation: achievements of the International Consortium of Orthopaedic Registries initiative.

Authors:  Art Sedrakyan; Elizabeth Paxton; Stephen Graves; Rebecca Love; Danica Marinac-Dabic
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am       Date:  2014-12-17       Impact factor: 5.284

4.  Two-stage hip revision arthroplasty for periprosthetic joint infection without the use of spacer or cemented implants.

Authors:  Yves Gramlich; Paul Hagebusch; Philipp Faul; Alexander Klug; Gerhard Walter; Reinhard Hoffmann
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2019-01-18       Impact factor: 3.075

5.  Early aseptic loosening of cementless monoblock acetabular components.

Authors:  Simo S A Miettinen; Tatu J Mäkinen; Inari Laaksonen; Keijo Mäkelä; Heini Huhtala; Jukka Kettunen; Ville Remes
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2016-08-10       Impact factor: 3.075

6.  Association of Bisphosphonate Use and Risk of Revision After THA: Outcomes From a US Total Joint Replacement Registry.

Authors:  Monti Khatod; Maria C S Inacio; Richard M Dell; Stefano A Bini; Elizabeth W Paxton; Robert S Namba
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2015-11       Impact factor: 4.176

7.  Long-term outcomes of total hip arthroplasty in patients younger than 55 years: a systematic review of the contemporary literature

Authors:  Xin Yu Mei; Ying Jia Gong; Oleg Safir; Allan Gross; Paul Kuzyk
Journal:  Can J Surg       Date:  2019-08-01       Impact factor: 2.089

8.  Are The Applications of Tranexamic Acid in Reverse Hybrid Total Knee Arthroplasty (TKA) The Same as Those in Fully Cemented TKA?: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

Authors:  Shenqi Zhang; Fengyan Wang; Chengbin Wang; Pengfei Chu; Lei Shi; Qingyun Xue
Journal:  Adv Ther       Date:  2021-04-08       Impact factor: 3.845

9.  Do Rerevision Rates Differ After First-time Revision of Primary THA With a Cemented and Cementless Femoral Component?

Authors:  Kirill Gromov; Alma B Pedersen; Søren Overgaard; Peter Gebuhr; Henrik Malchau; Anders Troelsen
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2015-11       Impact factor: 4.176

10.  Engineered protein coatings to improve the osseointegration of dental and orthopaedic implants.

Authors:  Jordan Raphel; Johan Karlsson; Silvia Galli; Ann Wennerberg; Christopher Lindsay; Matthew G Haugh; Jukka Pajarinen; Stuart B Goodman; Ryo Jimbo; Martin Andersson; Sarah C Heilshorn
Journal:  Biomaterials       Date:  2016-01-06       Impact factor: 12.479

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.