Purchase one-time access:Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online access
One-time access price info
- For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
- For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'
Subscribe:Subscribe to The Journal of Arthroplasty
- Hip and knee implants: current trends and policy considerations.Health Aff. 2008; 27: 1587
- Osteoarthritis: and update with relevance for clinical practice.Lancet. 2011; 377: 2115
Zimmer 2009 annual report to shareholders. Accessed on February 20, 2001 at: http://investor.zimmer.com/annuals.cfm?id=8.
- Cost drivers in total hip arthroplasty: effects of procedure volume and implant selling price.Am J Orthop. 2009; 38: E1
- A surgeon's look at costs in total joint arthroplasty.(Accessed on: 23 January 2011 at)http://www.healthpointcapital.com/research/2006/03/31/a_surgeons_look_at_costs_in_total_joint_arthroplasty/(March 2006)
- Femoral and acetabular component utilization in the United States.in: Thirty Ninth Open Meeting of The Hip Society; Final scientific program February 192011
- The arthritic, osteoporotic stiff hip. Surgical tips for total hip replacement.AAOS Proc. 2009; : 54
- Point-counterpoint. Optimal fixation of acetabularcomponents: fixation of the acetabular component: the case for cementless bone ingrowth modular sockets.J Arthroplasty. 1996; 11: 3
- The Swedish total hipreplacement register.J Bone Joint Surg [Br]. 2002; 84: 2
- Acetabular options: notes from the other side.Orthopedics. 2009; 32: 664
- The epidemiology of revision total hip arthroplasty in the United States.J Bone Joint Surg [AM]. 2009; 91: 128
- Comparison of the results of cemented, porous-ingrowth, and threaded acetabular cup fixation.J Arthroplasty. 1995; 10: 339
- Orthopedics data compendium: use, cost, and market structure for total joint replacement. 2006 (Accessed on June 12, 2011 at)August)
Higgins JPT, Green D, editors. Cochrane handbook of systematic reviews of interventions version 5.1.0 [updated March 2010]. The Cochrane collaboration; 2011. Available from www.cochrane-handbook.org.
- Cemented all-polyethylene cups versus uncemented porous coated cups—10 year results of prospective randomized study.J Bone Joint Surg [BR]. 2011; 93-B: 128
- Åhlund. No differences in outcomes between cemented and uncemented acetabular components after 12-14 years: results from a randomized controlled trial comparing Duraloc with Charnley cups.J Orthop Trauma. 2010; 11: 37
- Different loss of BMS using uncemented press-fit and whole polyethylene cups fixed with cement.Acta Orthop. 2006; 77: 218
- A randomized controlled trial comparing methods of acetabular fixation in primary total hip replacements in elderly patients.in: European Federation of National Associations of Orthopedics and Traumatology (EFORT) - presentation2008
- A comparison of polyethylene wear rates between cemented and cementless cups.J Bone Joint Surg [Br]. 2004; 86-B: 344
- Wear in uncemented porous and cemented polyethylene sockets.J Bone Joint Surg [Br]. 1998; 80-B: 345
- A prospective randomized study of all-polyethylene versus porous-coated acetabular components.in: 2010 AAOS annual meeting podium presentations 2010;Presentation made on March 102010 (podium no: 113)
- A randomised prospective trial comparing methods of acetabular implant fixation in primary total hip replacements; early results.Eur Orthop Res Soc. 2006; 16: P28
- Bioactive cement or ceramic/porous coating vs. conventional cement to obtain early stability of the acetabular cup. Randomized study of 96 hips followed with radiostereometry.J Orthop Res. 2004; 22: 1035
- Cemented versus uncemented socket in hip arthroplasty.Acta Orthop Scand. 1994; 65: 517
- Migration of acetabular components, inserted with and without cement,in one-stage bilateral hip arthroplasty.J Bone Joint Surg [Am]. 1994; 76-A: 185
- The charnley versus the spectron hip prosthesis: clinical evaluation of a randomized, prospective study of 2 different hip implants.J Arthroplasty. 1999; 14: 407
- Total hip arthroplasty.J Arthroplasty. 1991; 6: 19
- A randomized clinical trial comparing cemented to cementless total hip replacement in 250 osteoarthritic patients: the impact of health related quality of life and cost effectiveness.Iowa Orthop J. 1994; 14: 108
- Comparison of total hip arthroplasty performed with and without cement: a randomized trial.J Bone Joint Surg [Am]. 2002; 84: 1823
- Primary total hip replacement surgery: a systematic review of outcomes and modeling of cost-effectiveness associated with different prostheses.Health Technol Assess. 1998; 2
- Total hip arthroplasty with use of second generation cementing techniques: an eighteen year average follow up study.J Bone Joint Surg [AM]. 1998; 80: 1632
- The optimal fixation of the cementless acetabular component in primary total hip arthroplasty.J Am Acad Orthop Surg. 2002; 10: 43
- National Joint Registry for England and Wales.in: 7th annual report for England and Wales2010 (Accessed on August 2, 2011 at)
- Annual report 2008.(Accessed on August 2, 2011 at)
Harlt A, Schillinger M, Wanivenhaus A. Cemented versus cementless total hip arthroplasty for osteoarthritis and other non-traumatic diseases. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2004 2009; Issue 3: Art. No.: CD004850. DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD004850.
- HTA Report—prosthesesfor primary total hip replacement in Italy, Rome. 2008
- Early migration predicts late aseptic failure of hip sockets.J Bone Joint Surg [Br]. 1996; 78: 422
- Cemented versus uncemented socket in hip arthroplasty. A radiostereomertic study of 60 randomized hips followed for 2 years.Acta Orthop Scand. 1994; 65: 517
- Migration of acetabular components, inserted with and without cement, in one-stage bilateral hip arthroplasty.J Bone Joint Surg [AM]. 1994; 76: 185
Supplementary material available at www.arthroplastyjournal.org.
The Conflict of Interest statement associated with this article can be found at doi:10.1016/j.arth.2011.12.008.