Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorBadawy, Monaen_US
dc.contributor.authorFenstad, Anne Marieen_US
dc.contributor.authorFurnes, Oveen_US
dc.date.accessioned2020-06-10T11:08:37Z
dc.date.available2020-06-10T11:08:37Z
dc.date.issued2019-06-18
dc.PublishedBadawy M, Fenstad F, Furnes O. Primary constrained and hinged total knee arthroplasty: 2- and 5-year revision risk compared with unconstrained total knee arthroplasty: a report on 401 cases from the Norwegian Arthroplasty Register 1994-2017. Acta Orthopaedica. 2019;90(5):467-472eng
dc.identifier.issn1745-3674
dc.identifier.issn1745-3682
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/1956/22521
dc.description.abstractBackground and purpose — The number of primary, highly constrained knee arthroplasty implants has increased with a theoretically increased risk of early failure. Therefore we analyzed the risk of all revision following total knee arthroplasty (TKA) in patients receiving a hinged or condylar constrained knee (CCK) compared with a conventional unconstrained TKA. Patients and methods — The analyses included 401 primary highly constrained or hinged implants from 1994 to 2017. Kaplan–Meier survival curves were used to evaluate time to first revision with a maximum follow-up of 20 years. Cox regression was used to calculate hazard ratio (HR) comparing condylar constrained knee (CCK), hinged, and unconstrained TKA. Results — Kaplan–Meier estimated prosthesis survival after 2 years was 94.8% (95% CI 91.4–98.2) and 93.5% after 5 years for the primary CCK and 91.0% (CI 86.6–95.4) after 2 years and 85.5% after 5 years for the primary hinged TKA. Adjusted for sex, age groups, diagnosis, time period, previous surgery, and surgery time HR was 1.4 (CI 0.8–2.3) for the CCK and 2.4 (CI 1.6–3.7) for the hinged implants. The most common cause of revision in hinged implants was infection: 14 of 22 revisions. When excluding infection as revision cause, there were no differences in survival between the implant types. Estimated survival excluding infection revisions at 5 years was 96% for unconstrained, CCK, and hinged primary TKA implants. Interpretation — Primary rotating hinge total knee arthroplasty had a higher risk of revision compared with conventional TKA after 2 and 5 years’ follow-up. Infection was the most common cause of revision. When excluding infection revisions from the survival analysis, hinged and CCK implants had similar performance to unconstrained TKA.en_US
dc.language.isoengeng
dc.publisherTaylor & Franciseng
dc.rightsAttribution CC BYeng
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/eng
dc.titlePrimary constrained and hinged total knee arthroplasty: 2- and 5-year revision risk compared with unconstrained total knee arthroplasty: a report on 401 cases from the Norwegian Arthroplasty Register 1994-2017en_US
dc.typePeer reviewed
dc.typeJournal article
dc.date.updated2019-12-13T14:09:02Z
dc.description.versionpublishedVersionen_US
dc.rights.holderCopyright 2019 The Author(s)
dc.identifier.doihttps://doi.org/10.1080/17453674.2019.1627638
dc.identifier.cristin1743542
dc.source.journalActa Orthopaedica


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record

Attribution CC BY
Except where otherwise noted, this item's license is described as Attribution CC BY