A randomised controlled trial of cemented versus cementless press-fit condylar total knee replacement
We report the long-term survival of a prospective randomised consecutive series of 501 primary knee replacements using the press-fit condylar posterior cruciate ligament-retaining prosthesis. Patients received either cemented (219 patients, 277 implants) or cementless (177 patients, 224 implants) fi...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Journal of bone and joint surgery. British volume 2007-12, Vol.89 (12), p.1608 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | |
---|---|
container_issue | 12 |
container_start_page | 1608 |
container_title | Journal of bone and joint surgery. British volume |
container_volume | 89 |
creator | Baker, P N Khaw, F M Kirk, L M G Esler, C N A Gregg, P J |
description | We report the long-term survival of a prospective randomised consecutive series of 501 primary knee replacements using the press-fit condylar posterior cruciate ligament-retaining prosthesis. Patients received either cemented (219 patients, 277 implants) or cementless (177 patients, 224 implants) fixation. Altogether, 44 of 501 knees (8.8%) underwent revision surgery (24 cemented vs 20 cementless). For cemented knees the 15-year survival rate was 80.7% (95% confidence interval (CI) 71.5 to 87.4) and for cementless knees it was 75.3% (95% CI 63.5 to 84.3). There was no significant difference between the two groups (cemented vs cementless; hazard ratio (HR) 0.83, 95% CI 0.45 to 1.52, p = 0.55). When comparing the covariates there was no significant difference in the rates of survival between the side of operation (HR 0.58, p = 0.07), age (HR 0.97, p = 0.10) and diagnosis (HR 1.25 p = 0.72). However, there was a significant gender difference, with males having a higher failure rate with cemented fixation (HR 2.48, p = 0.004). Females had a similar failure rate in both groups. This single-surgeon series, with no loss to follow-up, provides reliable data of the revision rates of one of the most commonly-used total knee replacements. The survival of the press-fit condylar total knee replacement remained good at 15 years, irrespective of the method of fixation. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1302/0301-620X.89B12.19363 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_229682152</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>1424230051</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c164t-260ebee884fa089d707802edef2538d18974b2e202f3b5a3ca513a6c97374a2e3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNo1jUFLAzEQhYMoWKs_QQjet05msrvJsRatQsGLgreS7s5Ca7qpSVbw37vSepl5b3jfGyFuFcwUAd4DgSoqhI-ZsQ8KZ8pSRWdigqBtoTWY839NVl-Kq5R2AKDLkiaC5zK6vg37beJWNqHPMXg_yhy3zsvQyYb33Ofx8s0xDenkPackD3GcRbfNf2D7412UOeQR--yZZeSDd8f0tbjonE98c9pT8f70-LZ4Llavy5fFfFU0qtK5wAp4w2yM7hwY29ZQG0BuucOSTKuMrfUGGQE72pSOGlcqclVja6q1Q6apuDv2HmL4Gjjl9S4MsR9frhFtZVCVSL8qNVpZ</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>229682152</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>A randomised controlled trial of cemented versus cementless press-fit condylar total knee replacement</title><source>Alma/SFX Local Collection</source><creator>Baker, P N ; Khaw, F M ; Kirk, L M G ; Esler, C N A ; Gregg, P J</creator><creatorcontrib>Baker, P N ; Khaw, F M ; Kirk, L M G ; Esler, C N A ; Gregg, P J</creatorcontrib><description>We report the long-term survival of a prospective randomised consecutive series of 501 primary knee replacements using the press-fit condylar posterior cruciate ligament-retaining prosthesis. Patients received either cemented (219 patients, 277 implants) or cementless (177 patients, 224 implants) fixation. Altogether, 44 of 501 knees (8.8%) underwent revision surgery (24 cemented vs 20 cementless). For cemented knees the 15-year survival rate was 80.7% (95% confidence interval (CI) 71.5 to 87.4) and for cementless knees it was 75.3% (95% CI 63.5 to 84.3). There was no significant difference between the two groups (cemented vs cementless; hazard ratio (HR) 0.83, 95% CI 0.45 to 1.52, p = 0.55). When comparing the covariates there was no significant difference in the rates of survival between the side of operation (HR 0.58, p = 0.07), age (HR 0.97, p = 0.10) and diagnosis (HR 1.25 p = 0.72). However, there was a significant gender difference, with males having a higher failure rate with cemented fixation (HR 2.48, p = 0.004). Females had a similar failure rate in both groups. This single-surgeon series, with no loss to follow-up, provides reliable data of the revision rates of one of the most commonly-used total knee replacements. The survival of the press-fit condylar total knee replacement remained good at 15 years, irrespective of the method of fixation.</description><edition>British volume</edition><identifier>ISSN: 2049-4394</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 2049-4408</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1302/0301-620X.89B12.19363</identifier><identifier>CODEN: JBSUAK</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>London: British Editorial Society of Bone & Joint Surgery</publisher><ispartof>Journal of bone and joint surgery. British volume, 2007-12, Vol.89 (12), p.1608</ispartof><rights>Copyright British Editorial Society of Bone & Joint Surgery Dec 2007</rights><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c164t-260ebee884fa089d707802edef2538d18974b2e202f3b5a3ca513a6c97374a2e3</citedby></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,27922,27923</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Baker, P N</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Khaw, F M</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kirk, L M G</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Esler, C N A</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gregg, P J</creatorcontrib><title>A randomised controlled trial of cemented versus cementless press-fit condylar total knee replacement</title><title>Journal of bone and joint surgery. British volume</title><description>We report the long-term survival of a prospective randomised consecutive series of 501 primary knee replacements using the press-fit condylar posterior cruciate ligament-retaining prosthesis. Patients received either cemented (219 patients, 277 implants) or cementless (177 patients, 224 implants) fixation. Altogether, 44 of 501 knees (8.8%) underwent revision surgery (24 cemented vs 20 cementless). For cemented knees the 15-year survival rate was 80.7% (95% confidence interval (CI) 71.5 to 87.4) and for cementless knees it was 75.3% (95% CI 63.5 to 84.3). There was no significant difference between the two groups (cemented vs cementless; hazard ratio (HR) 0.83, 95% CI 0.45 to 1.52, p = 0.55). When comparing the covariates there was no significant difference in the rates of survival between the side of operation (HR 0.58, p = 0.07), age (HR 0.97, p = 0.10) and diagnosis (HR 1.25 p = 0.72). However, there was a significant gender difference, with males having a higher failure rate with cemented fixation (HR 2.48, p = 0.004). Females had a similar failure rate in both groups. This single-surgeon series, with no loss to follow-up, provides reliable data of the revision rates of one of the most commonly-used total knee replacements. The survival of the press-fit condylar total knee replacement remained good at 15 years, irrespective of the method of fixation.</description><issn>2049-4394</issn><issn>2049-4408</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2007</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNo1jUFLAzEQhYMoWKs_QQjet05msrvJsRatQsGLgreS7s5Ca7qpSVbw37vSepl5b3jfGyFuFcwUAd4DgSoqhI-ZsQ8KZ8pSRWdigqBtoTWY839NVl-Kq5R2AKDLkiaC5zK6vg37beJWNqHPMXg_yhy3zsvQyYb33Ofx8s0xDenkPackD3GcRbfNf2D7412UOeQR--yZZeSDd8f0tbjonE98c9pT8f70-LZ4Llavy5fFfFU0qtK5wAp4w2yM7hwY29ZQG0BuucOSTKuMrfUGGQE72pSOGlcqclVja6q1Q6apuDv2HmL4Gjjl9S4MsR9frhFtZVCVSL8qNVpZ</recordid><startdate>20071201</startdate><enddate>20071201</enddate><creator>Baker, P N</creator><creator>Khaw, F M</creator><creator>Kirk, L M G</creator><creator>Esler, C N A</creator><creator>Gregg, P J</creator><general>British Editorial Society of Bone & Joint Surgery</general><scope>K9.</scope><scope>NAPCQ</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20071201</creationdate><title>A randomised controlled trial of cemented versus cementless press-fit condylar total knee replacement</title><author>Baker, P N ; Khaw, F M ; Kirk, L M G ; Esler, C N A ; Gregg, P J</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c164t-260ebee884fa089d707802edef2538d18974b2e202f3b5a3ca513a6c97374a2e3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2007</creationdate><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Baker, P N</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Khaw, F M</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kirk, L M G</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Esler, C N A</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gregg, P J</creatorcontrib><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Premium</collection><jtitle>Journal of bone and joint surgery. British volume</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Baker, P N</au><au>Khaw, F M</au><au>Kirk, L M G</au><au>Esler, C N A</au><au>Gregg, P J</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>A randomised controlled trial of cemented versus cementless press-fit condylar total knee replacement</atitle><jtitle>Journal of bone and joint surgery. British volume</jtitle><date>2007-12-01</date><risdate>2007</risdate><volume>89</volume><issue>12</issue><spage>1608</spage><pages>1608-</pages><issn>2049-4394</issn><eissn>2049-4408</eissn><coden>JBSUAK</coden><abstract>We report the long-term survival of a prospective randomised consecutive series of 501 primary knee replacements using the press-fit condylar posterior cruciate ligament-retaining prosthesis. Patients received either cemented (219 patients, 277 implants) or cementless (177 patients, 224 implants) fixation. Altogether, 44 of 501 knees (8.8%) underwent revision surgery (24 cemented vs 20 cementless). For cemented knees the 15-year survival rate was 80.7% (95% confidence interval (CI) 71.5 to 87.4) and for cementless knees it was 75.3% (95% CI 63.5 to 84.3). There was no significant difference between the two groups (cemented vs cementless; hazard ratio (HR) 0.83, 95% CI 0.45 to 1.52, p = 0.55). When comparing the covariates there was no significant difference in the rates of survival between the side of operation (HR 0.58, p = 0.07), age (HR 0.97, p = 0.10) and diagnosis (HR 1.25 p = 0.72). However, there was a significant gender difference, with males having a higher failure rate with cemented fixation (HR 2.48, p = 0.004). Females had a similar failure rate in both groups. This single-surgeon series, with no loss to follow-up, provides reliable data of the revision rates of one of the most commonly-used total knee replacements. The survival of the press-fit condylar total knee replacement remained good at 15 years, irrespective of the method of fixation.</abstract><cop>London</cop><pub>British Editorial Society of Bone & Joint Surgery</pub><doi>10.1302/0301-620X.89B12.19363</doi><edition>British volume</edition></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 2049-4394 |
ispartof | Journal of bone and joint surgery. British volume, 2007-12, Vol.89 (12), p.1608 |
issn | 2049-4394 2049-4408 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_journals_229682152 |
source | Alma/SFX Local Collection |
title | A randomised controlled trial of cemented versus cementless press-fit condylar total knee replacement |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-13T20%3A30%3A50IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=A%20randomised%20controlled%20trial%20of%20cemented%20versus%20cementless%20press-fit%20condylar%20total%20knee%20replacement&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20bone%20and%20joint%20surgery.%20British%20volume&rft.au=Baker,%20P%20N&rft.date=2007-12-01&rft.volume=89&rft.issue=12&rft.spage=1608&rft.pages=1608-&rft.issn=2049-4394&rft.eissn=2049-4408&rft.coden=JBSUAK&rft_id=info:doi/10.1302/0301-620X.89B12.19363&rft_dat=%3Cproquest%3E1424230051%3C/proquest%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=229682152&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true |