uu.seUppsala University Publications
Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Survival of uncemented acetabular monoblock cups: Evaluation of 210 hips in the Swedish Hip Arthroplasty Register
Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Medicine and Pharmacy, Faculty of Medicine, Department of Surgical Sciences, Orthopaedics.
2012 (English)In: Acta Orthopaedica, ISSN 1745-3674, E-ISSN 1745-3682, Vol. 83, no 3, 214-219 p.Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

Background and purpose

Monoblock acetabular cups represent a subtype of uncemented cups with the polyethylene liner molded into a metal shell, thus eliminating-or at least minimizing-potential backside wear. We hypothesized that the use of mono block cups could reduce the incidence of osteolysis and aseptic loosening, and thus improve survival compared to modular designs.

Patients and methods

We identified all 210 primary total hip arthroplasty (THA) procedures in the Swedish Hip Arthroplasty Register that used uncemented monoblock cups during the period 1999-2010. Kaplan-Meier and Cox regression analyses with adjustment for age, sex, and other variables were used to calculate survival rates and adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) of the revision risk for any reason. 1,130 modular cups, inserted during the same time period, were used as a control group.

Results

There was a nearly equal sex distribution in both groups. Median age at the index operation was 47 years in the monoblock group and 56 years in the control group (p < 0.001). The cumulative 5-year survival with any revision as the endpoint was 95% (95% CI: 91-98) for monoblock cups and 97% (CI: 96-98) for modular cups (p = 0.6). The adjusted HR for revision of monoblock cups compared to modular cups was 2 (CI: 0.8-6; p = 0.1). The use of 28-mm prosthesis heads rather than 22-mm heads reduced the risk of cup revision (HR = 0.2, CI: 0.1-0.5; p = 0.001).

Interpretation

Both cups showed good medium-term survival rates. There was no statistically significant difference in revision risk between the cup designs. Further review of the current patient population is warranted to determine the long-term durability and risk of revision of monoblock cup designs.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
2012. Vol. 83, no 3, 214-219 p.
National Category
Medical and Health Sciences
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:uu:diva-177223DOI: 10.3109/17453674.2012.688726ISI: 000304781000002OAI: oai:DiVA.org:uu-177223DiVA: diva2:540923
Available from: 2012-07-12 Created: 2012-07-04 Last updated: 2017-12-07Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text

Other links

Publisher's full text

Authority records BETA

Hailer, Nils P.

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Hailer, Nils P.
By organisation
Orthopaedics
In the same journal
Acta Orthopaedica
Medical and Health Sciences

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

doi
urn-nbn

Altmetric score

doi
urn-nbn
Total: 534 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf