Skip header and navigation

2 records – page 1 of 1.

Risk of cancer with metal-on-metal hip replacements: population based study.

https://arctichealth.org/en/permalink/ahliterature122265
Source
BMJ. 2012;345:e4646
Publication Type
Article
Date
2012
Author
Keijo T Mäkelä
Tuomo Visuri
Pekka Pulkkinen
Antti Eskelinen
Ville Remes
Petri Virolainen
Mika Junnila
Eero Pukkala
Author Affiliation
Department of Orthopaedics and Traumatology, Surgical Hospital, Turku University Hospital, FI-20701 Turku, Finland. keijo.makela@fimnet.fi
Source
BMJ. 2012;345:e4646
Date
2012
Language
English
Publication Type
Article
Keywords
Adolescent
Adult
Aged
Aged, 80 and over
Arthroplasty, Replacement, Hip - adverse effects - statistics & numerical data
Child
Epidemiologic Methods
Female
Finland - epidemiology
Hazardous Substances - adverse effects
Hip Prosthesis - adverse effects - statistics & numerical data
Humans
Male
Metals - adverse effects
Middle Aged
Neoplasms - epidemiology
Prosthesis Design
Young Adult
Abstract
To assess the risk of cancer associated with modern primary metal-on-metal hip replacements.
Population based study.
Nationwide retrospective comparative register.
10,728 patients who underwent metal-on-metal total hip arthroplasty and 18,235 patients who underwent conventional metal-on-polyethylene, ceramic-on-polyethylene, and ceramic-on-ceramic total hip arthroplasty (the non-metal-on-metal cohort) in the Finnish Arthroplasty Register 2001-10. Data on cancer cases up to 2010 for these cohorts were extracted from the Finnish Cancer Registry.
The relative risk of cancer was expressed as the ratio of observed to expected number of cases from the Finnish population--that is, the standardised incidence ratio. The relative risk of cancer in the metal-on-metal cohort compared with the non-metal-on-metal cohort was estimated with analyses of these ratios and Poisson regression.
The overall risk of cancer in patients with metal-on-metal hip implants was similar to that in the Finnish population (378 observed v 400 expected, standardised incidence ratio 0.95, 95% confidence interval 0.85 to 1.04). The overall risk of cancer in patients with metal-on-metal hip implants was also no higher than in patients who had received non-metal-on-metal hip implants (relative risk 0.92, 0.81 to 1.05).
Metal-on-metal hip replacements are not associated with an increased overall risk of cancer during a mean follow-up of four years.
Notes
Cites: Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1996 Aug;(329 Suppl):S269-798769341
Cites: Acta Orthop. 2010 Feb;81(1):77-8120178446
Cites: Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1996 Aug;(329 Suppl):S280-98769342
Cites: Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1996 Aug;(329 Suppl):S290-68769343
Cites: Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1997 May;(338):219-269170383
Cites: J Arthroplasty. 1999 Apr;14(3):272-8010220179
Cites: J Arthroplasty. 1999 Apr;14(3):326-3210220187
Cites: Int J Cancer. 1999 May 31;81(5):719-2210328222
Cites: Br J Cancer. 2005 Apr 11;92(7):1298-30115812477
Cites: Orthop Clin North Am. 2005 Apr;36(2):187-93, ix15833456
Cites: Eur J Epidemiol. 2005;20(6):537-4216121763
Cites: J Arthroplasty. 2006 Apr;21(3):311-2316627137
Cites: Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2006 Aug;15(8):1532-716896045
Cites: Joint Bone Spine. 2008 May;75(3):319-2117977772
Cites: J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2008 Jul;90(7):847-5118591590
Cites: J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2009 Jun;91(6):835-4219483243
Cites: J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2009 Aug;91(8):1019-2419651827
Cites: J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2009 Aug;91(8):1025-3019651828
Cites: Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2010 Feb;468(2):318-2519697090
Cites: Acta Paediatr. 1996 Feb;85(2):248-508640061
Cites: J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2011 Jan;93(1):27-3321196539
Cites: BMJ. 2011;342:d290521572134
Cites: Int J Dermatol. 2011 Jun;50(6):645-5821595656
Cites: Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2012 Feb;470(2):388-9421932102
Cites: BMJ. 2012;344:e141022374741
Cites: J Arthroplasty. 2012 Apr;27(4):533-538.e121908168
Cites: Acta Orthop. 2012 Jun;83(3):207-1322616745
Cites: Cancer Res. 2000 Mar 15;60(6):1619-2510749131
Cites: J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2000 Apr;82(4):457-7610761937
Cites: Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2003 Jan;(406):282-9612579029
Cites: Acta Orthop Scand. 2003 Jun;74(3):351-6012899558
Cites: J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2004 May;86(4):598-60615174562
Cites: J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1988 Aug;70(4):539-423403594
Cites: Acta Orthop Scand Suppl. 1991;241:27-302014738
Cites: Clin Immunol Immunopathol. 1992 Jun;63(3):205-131535838
Cites: J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1992 Nov;74(6):831-91447243
Cites: J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1994 Sep;76(5):701-128083255
Cites: J Natl Cancer Inst. 1995 Jan 4;87(1):28-337666459
Comment In: BMJ. 2012;345:e460522833625
PubMed ID
22833626 View in PubMed
Less detail

Use of the Finnish Information System on Occupational Exposure (FINJEM) in epidemiologic, surveillance, and other applications.

https://arctichealth.org/en/permalink/ahliterature265624
Source
Ann Occup Hyg. 2014 Apr;58(3):380-96
Publication Type
Article
Date
Apr-2014
Author
Timo Kauppinen
Sanni Uuksulainen
Anja Saalo
Ilpo Mäkinen
Eero Pukkala
Source
Ann Occup Hyg. 2014 Apr;58(3):380-96
Date
Apr-2014
Language
English
Publication Type
Article
Keywords
Epidemiological Monitoring
Finland - epidemiology
Hazardous Substances
Humans
Industry
Information Systems
Neoplasms
Occupational Diseases - epidemiology
Occupational Exposure - analysis
Occupations
Abstract
This paper reviews the use of the Finnish Information System on Occupational Exposure (Finnish job-exposure matrix, FINJEM) in different applications in Finland and other countries. We describe and discuss studies on FINJEM and studies utilizing FINJEM in regard to the validity of exposure estimates, occupational epidemiology, hazard surveillance and prevention, the assessment of health risks and the burden of disease, the assessment of exposure trends and future hazards, and the construction of job-exposure matrices (JEMs) in countries other than Finland. FINJEM can be used as an exposure assessment tool in occupational epidemiology, particularly in large register-based studies. It also provides information for hazard surveillance at the national level. It is able to identify occupations with high average exposures to chemical agents and can therefore serve the priority setting of prevention. However, it has only limited use at the workplace level due to the variability of exposure between workplaces. The national estimates of exposure and their temporal trends may contribute to the assessment of both the recent and future burden of work-related health outcomes. FINJEM has also proved to be useful in the construction of other national JEMs, for example in the Nordic Occupational Cancer study in the Nordic countries. FINJEM is a quantitative JEM, which can serve many purposes and its comprehensive documentation also makes it potentially useful in countries other than Finland.
PubMed ID
24401793 View in PubMed
Less detail