Skip header and navigation

Refine By

17 records – page 1 of 2.

Acrylic bone cements: clinical developments and current status: Scandinavia.

https://arctichealth.org/en/permalink/ahliterature177419
Source
Orthop Clin North Am. 2005 Jan;36(1):55-61, vi
Publication Type
Article
Date
Jan-2005
Author
Lars Lidgren
Otto Robertson
Author Affiliation
Department of Orthopedics, Lund University Hospital, SE-221 85, Lund, Sweden. lars.lidgren@ort.lu.se
Source
Orthop Clin North Am. 2005 Jan;36(1):55-61, vi
Date
Jan-2005
Language
English
Publication Type
Article
Keywords
Anti-Bacterial Agents - administration & dosage
Arthroplasty, Replacement
Bone Cements - therapeutic use
Drug Delivery Systems
Humans
Joint Prosthesis - adverse effects
Polymethyl Methacrylate - therapeutic use
Prosthesis Failure
Prosthesis-Related Infections - prevention & control
Scandinavia
Abstract
This article focuses on bone cement, the cementing technique used, and their influence on aseptic loosening and infection of acrylic and joint implants--Scandinavian view.
PubMed ID
15542123 View in PubMed
Less detail

Better survival of hybrid total knee arthroplasty compared to cemented arthroplasty.

https://arctichealth.org/en/permalink/ahliterature271743
Source
Acta Orthop. 2015;86(6):714-20
Publication Type
Article
Date
2015
Author
Gunnar Petursson
Anne Marie Fenstad
Leif Ivar Havelin
Øystein Gøthesen
Stein Håkon Låstad Lygre
Stephan M Röhrl
Ove Furnes
Source
Acta Orthop. 2015;86(6):714-20
Date
2015
Language
English
Publication Type
Article
Keywords
Aged
Arthroplasty, Replacement, Knee - methods
Bone Cements - therapeutic use
Female
Humans
Kaplan-Meier Estimate
Knee Prosthesis
Male
Norway - epidemiology
Proportional Hazards Models
Prosthesis Failure - etiology
Registries
Risk factors
Abstract
There have been few comparative studies on total knee replacement (TKR) with cemented tibia and uncemented femur (hybrid TKR). Previous studies have not shown any difference in revision rate between cemented and hybrid fixation, but these studies had few hybrid prostheses. We have evaluated the outcome of hybrid TKR based on data from the Norwegian Arthroplasty Register (NAR).
We compared 4,585 hybrid TKRs to 20,095 cemented TKRs with risk of revision for any cause as the primary endpoint. We included primary TKRs without patella resurfacing that were reported to the NAR during the years 1999-2012. To minimize the possible confounding effect of prosthesis brands, only brands that were used both as hybrids and cemented in more than 200 cases were included. Kaplan-Meier survival analysis and Cox regression analysis were done with adjustment for age, sex, and preoperative diagnosis. To include death as a competing risk, cumulative incidence function estimates were calculated.
Estimated survival at 11 years was 94.3% (95% CI: 93.9-94.7) in the cemented TKR group and 96.3% (CI: 95.3-97.3) in the hybrid TKR group. The adjusted Cox regression analysis showed a lower risk of revision in the hybrid group (relative risk = 0.58, CI: 0.48-0.72, p
Notes
Cites: Acta Orthop Scand. 2002 Apr;73(2):117-2912079006
Cites: Acta Orthop Scand. 2000 Aug;71(4):337-5311028881
Cites: J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1986 Nov;68(5):795-8033782249
Cites: J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1991 Mar;73(3):397-4092002078
Cites: Acta Orthop Scand. 1993 Jun;64(3):245-518322575
Cites: Acta Orthop Scand. 1994 Aug;65(4):375-867976280
Cites: J Arthroplasty. 1998 Jun;13(4):409-139645521
Cites: J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1998 Nov;80(11):1665-729840636
Cites: J Arthroplasty. 1998 Dec;13(8):882-99880180
Cites: Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1998 Nov;(356):58-659917668
Cites: Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1998 Nov;(356):66-729917669
Cites: J Arthroplasty. 1999 Jan;14(1):9-209926947
Cites: Acta Orthop. 2005 Jun;76(3):362-916156464
Cites: Acta Orthop. 2005 Dec;76(6):823-816470436
Cites: Acta Orthop. 2006 Feb;77(1):49-5616534702
Cites: J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2006 May;88(5):606-1316645105
Cites: J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2007 Mar;89(3):519-2517332100
Cites: J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2007 Oct;89(10):2204-1117908897
Cites: Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2008 May;466(5):1204-918324451
Cites: Knee. 2009 Jun;16(3):200-619097910
Cites: Acta Orthop. 2011 Jun;82(3):258-6721619500
Cites: Lancet. 2012 Apr 7;379(9823):1331-4022398175
Cites: Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2012;10:CD00619323076921
Cites: Acta Orthop. 2014 Apr;85(2):159-6424650025
Cites: J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2013 Sep 18;95(18):e13124048562
Cites: Bone Joint J. 2013 Mar;95-B(3):295-30023450010
Cites: J Arthroplasty. 2000 Sep;15(6):681-911021442
Cites: BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2003 Feb 5;4:112570876
PubMed ID
26179889 View in PubMed
Less detail

Blood loss in cemented THA is not reduced with postoperative versus preoperative start of thromboprophylaxis.

https://arctichealth.org/en/permalink/ahliterature125464
Source
Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2012 Sep;470(9):2591-8
Publication Type
Article
Date
Sep-2012
Author
Pål O Borgen
Ola E Dahl
Olav Reikerås
Author Affiliation
Martina Hansens Hospital, P.O. Box 23, 1306 Baerum Postterminal, Norway. pborg1@c2i.net
Source
Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2012 Sep;470(9):2591-8
Date
Sep-2012
Language
English
Publication Type
Article
Keywords
Aged
Aged, 80 and over
Arthroplasty, Replacement, Hip - adverse effects
Biological Markers - blood
Blood Loss, Surgical - prevention & control
Blood Transfusion
Bone Cements - therapeutic use
Chi-Square Distribution
Dalteparin - administration & dosage
Double-Blind Method
Drug Administration Schedule
Female
Fibrinolytic Agents - administration & dosage
Hematocrit
Hemoglobins - metabolism
Humans
Injections, Subcutaneous
Male
Middle Aged
Norway
Osteoarthritis, Hip - surgery
Postoperative Care
Postoperative Hemorrhage - blood - etiology - prevention & control
Preoperative Care
Prospective Studies
Time Factors
Treatment Outcome
Abstract
Thrombin formation commences perioperatively in orthopaedic surgery and therefore some surgeons prefer preoperative initiation of pharmacologic thromboprophylaxis. However, because of the potential for increased surgical bleeding, the postoperative initiation of thromboprophylaxis has been advocated to reduce blood loss, need for transfusion, and bleeding complications. Trials on timing of thromboprophylaxis have been designed primarily to detect thrombotic events, and it has been difficult to interpret the magnitude of blood loss and bleeding events owing to lack of information for bleeding volume and underpowered bleeding end points.
We therefore asked whether there are differences in blood loss, transfusion requirements, and other postoperative clinical complications with preoperative versus postoperative start of thromboprophylaxis with dalteparin.
In a double-blind, randomized controlled trial, 80 patients undergoing primary cemented THA were allocated to dalteparin injections starting 12 hours before or 6 hours after surgery. Blood loss was measured by weighing sponges and drapes, volume in suction drains during surgery, and wound drains until removal 24 hours postoperatively. Hemoglobin and hematocrit were recorded at predefined times during and after surgery.
We found no differences in blood loss (1081 mL ± 424 mL versus 1023 mL ± 238 mL), bleeding-related events (10% versus 17%), or number of patients who had transfusions (12 versus five) with preoperative and postoperative thromboprophylaxis, respectively. Other complications were few in both groups.
Our data suggest blood loss is similar with preoperative and postoperative initiation of dalteparin thromboprophylaxis, but indicate a trend toward fewer transfusion requirements which might favor postoperative start of thromboprophylaxis.
Notes
Cites: Orthopedics. 2009 Dec;32(12 Suppl):74-820201480
Cites: Clin Appl Thromb Hemost. 2009 Jul-Aug;15(4):377-8819608549
Cites: Thromb Res. 2010 Sep;126(3):164-520542545
Cites: J Thromb Haemost. 2010 Sep;8(9):1966-7520586919
Cites: Transfus Med Rev. 2011 Oct;25(4):304-16.e1-621640550
Cites: J Arthroplasty. 2011 Oct;26(7):1100-5.e121256705
Cites: Lancet. 1996 Oct 19;348(9034):1055-608874456
Cites: Arch Intern Med. 2000 Jul 24;160(14):2199-20710904464
Cites: J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2002 Feb;84-A(2):216-2011861727
Cites: Arch Intern Med. 2002 Jul 8;162(13):1451-612090880
Cites: Chest. 2003 Dec;124(6 Suppl):379S-385S14668421
Cites: J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2004 May;86(4):561-515174554
Cites: Ann Surg. 2004 Aug;240(2):205-1315273542
Cites: Lancet. 1969 Aug 2;2(7614):230-24184105
Cites: Thromb Haemost. 1988 Dec 22;60(3):407-102853459
Cites: J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1997 Sep;79(9):1365-729314399
Cites: Thromb Haemost. 1997 Oct;78(4):1189-929364983
Cites: J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1999 Jan;81(1):2-109973048
Cites: Acta Orthop. 2005 Jun;76(3):314-916156456
Cites: J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2007 Jan;89(1):33-817200307
Cites: Pathophysiol Haemost Thromb. 2006;35(6):428-3417565235
Cites: Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1995 Oct;(319):16-277554626
Cites: J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1995 Sep;77(5):715-97559695
Cites: J Arthroplasty. 2007 Dec;22(8):1162-718078885
Cites: Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2007 Dec;465:189-9517767075
Cites: Chest. 2008 Jun;133(6 Suppl):381S-453S18574271
Cites: Lancet. 2008 Jul 5;372(9632):31-918582928
Cites: J Arthroplasty. 2008 Sep;23(6 Suppl 1):15-918555656
Cites: J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2008 Sep;90(9):1128-3618757950
Cites: Hip Int. 2010 Jul-Sep;20(3):301-720640994
PubMed ID
22476844 View in PubMed
Less detail

Cemented total hip replacement for primary osteoarthritis in patients aged 55 years or older: results of the 12 most common cemented implants followed for 25 years in the Finnish Arthroplasty Register.

https://arctichealth.org/en/permalink/ahliterature153964
Source
J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2008 Dec;90(12):1562-9
Publication Type
Article
Date
Dec-2008
Author
K. Mäkelä
A. Eskelinen
P. Pulkkinen
P. Paavolainen
V. Remes
Author Affiliation
Department of Orthopaedics and Traumatology, Turku University Central Hospital, Rauhankatu 24 D 32, 20100 Turku, Finland. keijo.makela@tyks.fi
Source
J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2008 Dec;90(12):1562-9
Date
Dec-2008
Language
English
Publication Type
Article
Keywords
Aged
Arthroplasty, Replacement, Hip - methods - statistics & numerical data
Bone Cements - therapeutic use
Equipment Failure Analysis - statistics & numerical data
Female
Finland
Follow-Up Studies
Hip Prosthesis - standards - statistics & numerical data
Humans
Male
Middle Aged
Osteoarthritis, Hip - surgery
Prosthesis Design
Prosthesis Failure
Reoperation - statistics & numerical data
Time Factors
Treatment Outcome
Abstract
We have analysed from the Finnish Arthroplasty Register the long-term survivorship of the 12 most commonly-used cemented implants between 1980 and 2005 in patients aged 55 years or older with osteoarthritis. Only two designs of femoral component, the Exeter Universal and the Müller Straight femoral component had a survivorship of over 95% at ten years with revision for aseptic loosening as the endpoint. At 15 years of the femoral and acetabular component combinations, only the Exeter Universal/Exeter All-poly implant had a survival rate of over 90% with revision for aseptic loosening as the endpoint. In the subgroup of patients aged between 55 and 64 years, survivorship overall was less than 90% at ten years. The variation in the long-term rates of survival of different cemented hip implants was considerable in patients aged 55 years or older. In those aged between 55 and 64 years, none of the cemented prostheses studied yielded excellent long-term survival rates (> or = 90% at 15 years).
PubMed ID
19043125 View in PubMed
Less detail

Durable infection control and function with the PROSTALAC spacer in two-stage revision for infected knee arthroplasty.

https://arctichealth.org/en/permalink/ahliterature140409
Source
Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2011 Apr;469(4):985-93
Publication Type
Article
Date
Apr-2011
Author
Christopher R Gooding
Bassam A Masri
Clive P Duncan
Nelson V Greidanus
Donald S Garbuz
Author Affiliation
Division of Lower Limb Reconstruction and Oncology, Department of Orthopaedics, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada.
Source
Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2011 Apr;469(4):985-93
Date
Apr-2011
Language
English
Publication Type
Article
Keywords
Adult
Aged
Aged, 80 and over
Anti-Bacterial Agents - administration & dosage
Arthroplasty, Replacement, Knee - adverse effects - instrumentation
Bone Cements - therapeutic use
British Columbia
Coated Materials, Biocompatible
Debridement
Device Removal
Female
Humans
Infection Control - methods
Knee Joint - microbiology - physiopathology - radiography - surgery
Knee Prosthesis - adverse effects
Logistic Models
Male
Middle Aged
Prosthesis Design
Prosthesis-Related Infections - microbiology - radiography - therapy
Range of Motion, Articular
Recovery of Function
Recurrence
Reoperation
Retrospective Studies
Risk assessment
Risk factors
Time Factors
Treatment Outcome
Abstract
A two-stage revision total knee arthroplasty is recognized as the gold standard in the treatment of infection. However, traditional spacers limit function in the interval between the two stages and may cause instability, scarring, and bone erosion. The PROSTALAC knee spacer is an antibiotic-loaded cement articulating spacer that allows some movement of the knee between stages. Whether motion enhances long-term function is unknown.
We therefore identify the rate of control of infection using the PROSTALAC exchange spacer and to assess the clinical outcome after implantation with a definitive implant.
We retrospectively reviewed 115 knees that underwent two-stage exchange with the PROSTALAC spacer. Forty-eight of these had a minimum followup of 5 years (mean, 9 years; range, 5-12 years).
At last review, 101 of the 115 knees (88%) had no evidence of infection. Of the 14 knees that became reinfected, four were from the same organism and 10 were with a different organism. After further intervention, using the two-stage approach again, the infection was controlled in 12 of the 14 initially reinfected cases, resulting in a failure to cure in only two cases. We observed improvements in mean WOMAC, Oxford, UCLA, and Patient Satisfaction scores at last review.
The PROSTALAC functional spacer was associated with a 98% rate of control of infection and improvements in the quality-of-life outcomes in the treatment of chronically infected total knee arthroplasties.
Level IV, therapeutic study. See Guidelines for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.
Notes
Cites: Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2002 Nov;(404):113-512439248
Cites: Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2002 Nov;(404):132-812439251
Cites: Orthopade. 2003 Jun;32(6):516-2612819891
Cites: J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2003 Oct;85-A(10):1888-9214563794
Cites: J Arthroplasty. 2004 Oct;19(7):874-915483804
Cites: J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1972 Feb;54(1):61-765011747
Cites: Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1976 Oct;(120):47-53975666
Cites: Orthop Clin North Am. 1982 Jan;13(1):245-97063195
Cites: Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1983 Mar;(173):184-906825331
Cites: J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1983 Oct;65(8):1087-986630253
Cites: Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1984 Jun;(186):81-96723165
Cites: Instr Course Lect. 1986;35:319-243819421
Cites: J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1987 Apr;69(4):489-973571306
Cites: J Arthroplasty. 1987;2(1):27-363572409
Cites: Acta Orthop Scand. 1986 Dec;57(6):489-943577713
Cites: Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1988 Jan;(226):29-333335102
Cites: Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1988 Nov;(236):23-353180576
Cites: Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1989 Jan;(238):159-662910596
Cites: Orthop Clin North Am. 1989 Apr;20(2):201-102646563
Cites: Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1989 Nov;(248):57-602805496
Cites: J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1990 Feb;72(2):272-82303514
Cites: J Arthroplasty. 1990 Mar;5(1):35-92319246
Cites: J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1990 Jul;72(6):878-832365721
Cites: Acta Orthop Scand. 1991 Aug;62(4):301-111882666
Cites: Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1993 Jan;(286):94-1028425373
Cites: Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1994 Feb;(299):169-728119013
Cites: Curr Opin Rheumatol. 1994 Mar;6(2):172-68024962
Cites: Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1996 Oct;(331):118-248895627
Cites: Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1997 Dec;(345):148-549418632
Cites: J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2007 Jul;89(7):1409-1617606776
Cites: J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2000 Aug;82(6):807-1210990301
Cites: Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2000 Nov;(380):9-1611064968
Cites: Am J Knee Surg. 2001 Fall;14(4):209-1411703032
Cites: J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2002 Mar;84-A(3):49011886923
Cites: Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2002 Nov;(404):51-712439237
PubMed ID
20878287 View in PubMed
Less detail

Early failures among 14,009 cemented and 1,326 uncemented prostheses for primary coxarthrosis. The Norwegian Arthroplasty Register, 1987-1992.

https://arctichealth.org/en/permalink/ahliterature14374
Source
Acta Orthop Scand. 1994 Feb;65(1):1-6
Publication Type
Article
Date
Feb-1994
Author
L I Havelin
B. Espehaug
S E Vollset
L B Engesaeter
Author Affiliation
University of Bergen, Department of Orthopedics and Traumatology, Haukeland Hospital, Norway.
Source
Acta Orthop Scand. 1994 Feb;65(1):1-6
Date
Feb-1994
Language
English
Publication Type
Article
Keywords
Adult
Age Factors
Aged
Bone Cements - therapeutic use
Cementation
Comparative Study
Female
Follow-Up Studies
Hip Prosthesis
Humans
Male
Middle Aged
Norway
Osteoarthritis, Hip - surgery
Proportional Hazards Models
Prosthesis Failure
Registries
Regression Analysis
Reoperation
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Sex Factors
Time Factors
Abstract
In the Norwegian Arthroplasty Register, 15,335 primary total hip replacements (THR) in patients with primary arthrosis were followed for 0-5.4 years. The Kaplan-Meier estimate of cumulative failure (revision) after 4.5 years was 2.7 percent for cemented THR, compared to 6.5 percent for uncemented. In patients under 65 years the cumulative revisions for cemented and uncemented THR were 3.3 and 7.9 percent. For the acetabular components, the cumulative failures were 0.6 percent for cemented and 1.7 percent for uncemented, and for femoral components 1.7 and 3.9 percent after 4.5 years. Adjusting for age and sex using a Cox regression model, 2 times higher rates of failure were found comparing uncemented to cemented THR. The results for uncemented prostheses were more unfavorable in young patients. In men and women under 60, the revision rates were increased 6 and 3 times, respectively, for patients with uncemented THR compared to those with cemented THR. Restriction of the end-point to revision for aseptic loosening gave results similar to the over-all results. No difference between cemented and uncemented THR was seen for revisions due to infection, whereas the most unfavorable results for uncemented THR were seen when revisions due to causes other than infection and aseptic loosening were considered.
PubMed ID
8154270 View in PubMed
Less detail

The effect of hospital-type and operating volume on the survival of hip replacements. A review of 39,505 primary total hip replacements reported to the Norwegian Arthroplasty Register, 1988-1996.

https://arctichealth.org/en/permalink/ahliterature52591
Source
Acta Orthop Scand. 1999 Feb;70(1):12-8
Publication Type
Article
Date
Feb-1999
Author
B. Espehaug
L I Havelin
L B Engesaeter
S E Vollset
Author Affiliation
Department of Public Health and Primary Health Care, University of Bergen, Norway.
Source
Acta Orthop Scand. 1999 Feb;70(1):12-8
Date
Feb-1999
Language
English
Publication Type
Article
Keywords
Adult
Aged
Arthroplasty, Replacement, Hip - adverse effects - methods - utilization
Bone Cements - therapeutic use
Female
Hospitals, Community - statistics & numerical data - utilization
Hospitals, District - statistics & numerical data - utilization
Hospitals, University - statistics & numerical data - utilization
Humans
Male
Middle Aged
Norway - epidemiology
Outcome Assessment (Health Care)
Proportional Hazards Models
Prosthesis Design
Registries
Reoperation - statistics & numerical data
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Survival Analysis
Treatment Outcome
Abstract
We investigated associations between the survival of total hip replacements (THRs), type of hospital and annual number of THRs per hospital. The study was based on 39,505 primary THRs reported to the Norwegian Arthroplasty Register from 45 local (n 20,756), 15 central (n 12,455) and 10 university hospitals (n 6,294) during 1988-1996. The annual number of THRs was highest at central and university hospitals, both of which are training hospitals. University hospitals were further characterized by the lowest mean annual number of THRs performed per surgeon. For cemented THRs, with adjustment for gender, age, diagnosis, surgical procedure, and annual hospital volume, the revision rates at central and university hospitals were 0.8 (95% confidence interval: 0.67-0.95) and 1.2 (CI: 1.02-1.47) times that of local hospitals, respectively. A high annual number of cemented THRs per hospital was not associated with lower revision rates. In uncemented THRs, survival results were similar in central and local hospitals, whereas the adjusted revision rate at university hospitals was 1.6 (CI: 1.13-2.19) times that of local hospitals. The adjusted 6.5 year revision probability was 12% in hospitals performing 84 operations (n 526).
PubMed ID
10191740 View in PubMed
Less detail

Exeter and charnley arthroplasties with Boneloc or high viscosity cement. Comparison of 1,127 arthroplasties followed for 5 years in the Norwegian Arthroplasty Register.

https://arctichealth.org/en/permalink/ahliterature52668
Source
Acta Orthop Scand. 1997 Dec;68(6):515-20
Publication Type
Article
Date
Dec-1997
Author
O. Furnes
S A Lie
L I Havelin
S E Vollset
L B Engesaeter
Author Affiliation
Department of Orthopaedics, Haukeland University Hospital, Bergen, Norway.
Source
Acta Orthop Scand. 1997 Dec;68(6):515-20
Date
Dec-1997
Language
English
Publication Type
Article
Keywords
Aged
Arthroplasty, Replacement, Hip - statistics & numerical data
Bone Cements - therapeutic use
Female
Follow-Up Studies
Humans
Male
Methacrylates - therapeutic use
Norway
Prosthesis Failure
Registries
Regression Analysis
Reoperation
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Treatment Outcome
Abstract
During the years 1991-1994, the Norwegian Arthroplasty Register recorded 1,324 primary hip arthroplasties implanted with the Boneloc cement. We have compared the survival until revision due to aseptic loosening for charnley (n 955) and Exeter (n 172) prostheses. The Boneloc cemented hips were also compared with high viscosity cemented hips implanted during the same period. In the Boneloc cemented group, the estimated probability of survival at 4.5 years of a Charnley femoral component was 74% and for an Exeter femoral component 97% (p
PubMed ID
9462347 View in PubMed
Less detail

Heterotopic ossification after primary cemented and noncemented total hip arthroplasty in patients with osteoarthritis and rheumatoid arthritis.

https://arctichealth.org/en/permalink/ahliterature218431
Source
Can J Surg. 1994 Apr;37(2):135-9
Publication Type
Article
Date
Apr-1994
Author
I H Lieberman
E. Moran
D E Hastings
E R Bogoch
Author Affiliation
Division of Orthopaedic Surgery, Wellesley Hospital, University of Toronto, Ont.
Source
Can J Surg. 1994 Apr;37(2):135-9
Date
Apr-1994
Language
English
Publication Type
Article
Keywords
Adult
Aged
Arthritis, Rheumatoid - complications - radiography - surgery
Bone Cements - therapeutic use
Female
Hip Joint - radiography
Hip Prosthesis
Humans
Incidence
Male
Middle Aged
Ontario - epidemiology
Ossification, Heterotopic - epidemiology - radiography
Osteoarthritis, Hip - complications - radiography - surgery
Postoperative Complications - epidemiology - radiography
Prospective Studies
Prosthesis Design
Risk factors
Sex Distribution
Abstract
To compare the frequency and severity of heterotopic ossification (HO) in patients with osteoarthritis or rheumatoid arthritis who undergo cemented or noncemented total hip arthroplasty.
A prospective case study.
A university referral centre.
One hundred and sixty one patients underwent 184 total hip arthroplasties. The 184 hips were categorized as follows: cemented total hip arthroplasty--60 osteoarthritis hips, 26 hips affected by rheumatoid arthritis; noncemented total hip arthroplasty--67 osteoarthritic hips, 31 hips affected by rheumatoid arthritis.
Total hip arthroplasty. A standard approach was used to implant either a cemented or noncemented prosthesis. Radiographs were obtained of each hip preoperatively, immediately postoperatively and 6 weeks, 3 months, 6 months and 1 year postoperatively.
Radiographs were graded in blind fashion for HO, according to the criteria of Brooker. Modified Harris hip scores were calculated at 1 and 2 years postoperatively.
HO (incidence of Brooker grades 2, 3 and 4) was greater after cemented (22%) than noncemented (9%) total hip arthroplasty in osteoarthritic hips (p
Notes
Comment In: Can J Surg. 1994 Apr;37(2):89-908156476
PubMed ID
8156466 View in PubMed
Less detail

Incidence of total hip replacement for primary osteoarthrosis in Iceland 1982-1996.

https://arctichealth.org/en/permalink/ahliterature14156
Source
Acta Orthop Scand. 1999 Jun;70(3):229-33
Publication Type
Article
Date
Jun-1999
Author
T. Ingvarsson
G. Hägglund
H. Jónsson
L S Lohmander
Author Affiliation
Department of Orthopedics, Central Hospital, Akureyri, Iceland. thi@nett.is
Source
Acta Orthop Scand. 1999 Jun;70(3):229-33
Date
Jun-1999
Language
English
Publication Type
Article
Keywords
Adult
Age Distribution
Aged
Aged, 80 and over
Arthroplasty, Replacement, Hip - statistics & numerical data - trends
Bone Cements - therapeutic use
Comparative Study
Female
Forecasting
Hip Prosthesis - statistics & numerical data
Humans
Iceland - epidemiology
Incidence
Male
Middle Aged
Osteoarthritis, Hip - epidemiology - surgery
Prevalence
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Sex Distribution
Sweden - epidemiology
Abstract
We report the incidence of total hip replacements performed in Iceland between 1982 and 1996. During this period, 3,403 hip arthroplasties were done. The annual number of procedures increased from 94 hips in 1982 to 323 hips in 1996. Annual rates of total hip replacements due to primary osteoarthrosis per 10(5) inhabitants were 68 in 1982-1986, 90 in 1987-1991, and 114 in 1992-1996. In the years 1992-1996, the age-standardized incidence of total hip replacements for primary osteoarthrosis was 3/10(5) among patients younger than 39 years of age, while it was 621/10(5) among those 70-79 years of age. The mean age at surgery for primary osteoarthrosis was 69 years in both men and women. Incidence rates in various countries are difficult to compare, but by using age-standardized data and correction for differences in population structures between Iceland and Sweden, we find that the incidence of total hip replacement for primary osteoarthrosis of the hip is at least 50% higher in Iceland than in Sweden. This difference is consistent with the higher prevalence of hip osteoarthrosis observed in Iceland than in Sweden.
PubMed ID
10429596 View in PubMed
Less detail

17 records – page 1 of 2.