2004
DOI: 10.1097/01.blo.0000147136.98303.9d
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Why Are Total Knee Replacements Revised?

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

0
21
0
1

Year Published

2009
2009
2017
2017

Publication Types

Select...
6
2
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 113 publications
(22 citation statements)
references
References 19 publications
0
21
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…During the first two years after total knee arthroplasty, infections are counted as the second most common cause for revision surgery after instability. 45 Peri-operative broad spectrum antibiotic treatments are not effective in preventing biofilm formation on the surface of the implant. Due to the slow breakdown of HA in vivo and the resulting slow Ag release from the coating, the surface of the implant where biofilms are most likely to form can remain protected for extensive periods of time.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…During the first two years after total knee arthroplasty, infections are counted as the second most common cause for revision surgery after instability. 45 Peri-operative broad spectrum antibiotic treatments are not effective in preventing biofilm formation on the surface of the implant. Due to the slow breakdown of HA in vivo and the resulting slow Ag release from the coating, the surface of the implant where biofilms are most likely to form can remain protected for extensive periods of time.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Data on implant survival, compiled through the Scandinavian Knee Arthroplasty Register, indicate that ∼90% of primary cemented TKR implants survive >10 years 5 . The most common causes of implant failure after TKR are aseptic loosening, infection, and implant wear 6,7 . Cementless fixation, despite its potential advantage in terms of the elimination of bone cement as a source of wear debris, is associated with a higher rate of revision compared with cemented TKR 5 .…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Risk factors associated with revisions and complications have also been identified. Similar to the experience in other registries [4,8,15], quality of care has been enhanced with timely feedback to physicians on implants and techniques associated with higher rates of revisions and complications. This feedback in combination with prospective studies indicating higher revision rates in unicompartmental knees, the uncemented TKA technique, and smaller femoral head sizes has resulted in a reduction in these implant choices and techniques.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%