Vis enkel innførsel

dc.contributor.authorBirkeland, Øystein
dc.contributor.authorEspehaug, Birgitte
dc.contributor.authorHavelin, Leif Ivar
dc.contributor.authorFurnes, Ove
dc.coverage.spatialNorwaynb_NO
dc.date.accessioned2019-05-28T06:49:19Z
dc.date.available2019-05-28T06:49:19Z
dc.date.created2018-01-16T09:37:10Z
dc.date.issued2017
dc.identifier.citationBirkeland, Ø., Espehaug, B., Havelin, L. I., & Furnes, O. (2016). Bone cement product and failure in total knee arthroplasty. Acta Orthopaedica, 88(1), 75-81.nb_NO
dc.identifier.issn1745-3674
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/11250/2599091
dc.description.abstractBackground and purpose — The bone cement market for total knee arthroplasty (TKA) in Norway has been dominated by a few products and distributors. Palacos with gentamicin had a market share exceeding 90% before 2005, but it was then withdrawn from the market and replaced by new slightly altered products. We have compared the survival of TKAs fixated with Palacos with gentamicin with the survival of TKAs fixated with the bone cements that took over the market. Patients and methods — Using data from the Norwegian Arthroplasty Register for the period 1997–2013, we included 26,147 primary TKAs in the study. The inclusion criteria were TKAs fixated with the 5 most used bone cements and the 5 most common total knee prostheses for that time period. 6-year Kaplan-Meier survival probabilities were established for each cement product. The Cox proportional hazards regression model was used to assess the association between bone cement product and revision risk. Separate analyses were performed with revision for any reason and revision due to deep infection within 1 year postoperatively as endpoints. Adjustments were made for age, sex, diagnosis, and prosthesis brand. Results — Survival was similar for the prostheses in the follow-up period, between the 5 bone cements included: Palacos with gentamicin, Refobacin Palacos R, Refobacin Bone Cement R (Refobacin BCR), Optipac Refobacin Bone Cement R (Optipac Refobacin BCR), and Palacos R + G. Interpretation — According to our findings, the use of the new bone cements led to a survival rate that was as good as with the old bone cement (Palacos with gentamicin).nb_NO
dc.language.isoengnb_NO
dc.publisherTaylor & Francisnb_NO
dc.rightsNavngivelse-Ikkekommersiell 4.0 Internasjonal*
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/deed.no*
dc.titleBone cement product and failure in total knee arthroplasty : A follow-up study of 26,147 knee replacements between 1997 and 2013 in Norwaynb_NO
dc.typeJournal articlenb_NO
dc.typePeer reviewednb_NO
dc.description.versionpublishedVersionnb_NO
dc.rights.holder© 2016 The Author(s).nb_NO
dc.subject.nsiVDP::Medisinske Fag: 700::Klinisk medisinske fag: 750::Reumatologi: 759nb_NO
dc.source.pagenumber75-81nb_NO
dc.source.volume88nb_NO
dc.source.journalActa Orthopaedicanb_NO
dc.source.issue1nb_NO
dc.identifier.doi10.1080/17453674.2016.1256937
dc.identifier.cristin1543702
cristin.unitcode203,3,20,0
cristin.unitnameSenter for kunnskapsbasert praksis - Bergen
cristin.ispublishedtrue
cristin.fulltextoriginal
cristin.qualitycode1


Tilhørende fil(er)

Thumbnail

Denne innførselen finnes i følgende samling(er)

Vis enkel innførsel

Navngivelse-Ikkekommersiell 4.0 Internasjonal
Med mindre annet er angitt, så er denne innførselen lisensiert som Navngivelse-Ikkekommersiell 4.0 Internasjonal