Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29072088›Full record

ArticleActa orthopaedica2018

The association between cement type and the subsequent risk of revision surgery in primary total hip replacement.

Lea Trela-Larsen, Adrian Sayers, Ashley William Blom, Jason Crispin John Webb, Michael Richard Whitehouse

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Acta orthopaedica, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Lea Trela-Larsena Musculoskeletal Research Unit , School of Clinical Sciences, University of Bristol, Southmead Hospital , Bristol , UK.
Adrian Sayersa Musculoskeletal Research Unit , School of Clinical Sciences, University of Bristol, Southmead Hospital , Bristol , UK.
Ashley William Bloma Musculoskeletal Research Unit , School of Clinical Sciences, University of Bristol, Southmead Hospital , Bristol , UK.
Jason Crispin John Webba Musculoskeletal Research Unit , School of Clinical Sciences, University of Bristol, Southmead Hospital , Bristol , UK.
Michael Richard Whitehousea Musculoskeletal Research Unit , School of Clinical Sciences, University of Bristol, Southmead Hospital , Bristol , UK.

Funding

Medical Research Council MR/L01226X/1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background and purpose - To further improve the success of joint replacement surgery, attention needs to be paid to variations associated with improved or worsened outcomes. We investigated the association between the type of bone cement used and the risk of revision surgery after primary total hip replacement. Methods - We conducted a prospective study of data from the National Joint Registry for England and Wales between April 1, 2003 and December 31, 2013. 199,205 primary total hip replacements performed for osteoarthritis where bone cement was used were included. A multilevel over-dispersed piecewise Poisson model was used to estimate differences in the rate of revision by bone cement type adjusted for implant type, head size, age, sex, ASA grade, and surgical approach. Results - The rate of revision was higher in DePuy CMW3 medium viscosity with gentamicin (IRR 2.0, 95% CI 1.5-2.7) and DePuy SmartSet high viscosity plain (IRR 2.7, 95% CI 1.1-5.5), and lower in DePuy CMW1 high viscosity plain (IRR 0.44, 95% CI 0.19-0.89) bone cements compared with Heraeus Palacos high viscosity with gentamicin. Revision rates were similar between plain and antibiotic-loaded bone cement. Interpretation - The majority of bone cements performed similarly well, excluding DePuy SmartSet high viscosity and CMW3 high viscosity with gentamicin, which both had higher revision rates. We found no clear differences by viscosity or antibiotic content.

Indexed as

Arthroplasty, Replacement, HipAdultAgedAged, 80 and overBone CementsFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedProspective StudiesRegistriesReoperationRisk FactorsUnited KingdomBone Cements

Identifiers

PMID29072088
PMCPMC5810831

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.