Siirry päänavigointiin Siirry hakuun Siirry pääsisältöön

Impact of the Nordic Arthroplasty Register Association (NARA) collaboration on demographics, methods and revision rates in knee arthroplasty: a register-based study from NARA 2000–2017

  • Tero Irmola*
  • , Ville Ponkilainen
  • , Keijo T. Mäkelä
  • , Otto Robertsson
  • , Annette W-Dahl
  • , Ove Furnes
  • , Anne M. Fenstad
  • , Alma B. Pedersen
  • , Henrik M. Schrøder
  • , Mika J. Niemeläinen
  • , Antti Eskelinen
  • *Tämän työn vastaava kirjoittaja

Tutkimustuotos: ArtikkeliTieteellinenvertaisarvioitu

9 Sitaatiot (Scopus)
12 Lataukset (Pure)

Abstrakti

Background and purpose — We have previously observed differences in treatment and outcome of knee arthroplasties in the Nordic countries. To evaluate the impact of Nordic collaboration in the last 15 years we aimed to compare patient demographics, methods, and revision rates in primary knee arthroplasties among the 4 Nordic countries. Patients and methods — We included 535,051 primary knee arthroplasties reported 2000–2017 from the Nordic Arthroplasty Register Association (NARA) database. Kaplan–Meier analysis (KM) and restricted mean survival time (RMST) analysis were used to evaluate the cumulative revision rate (CRR) and RMST estimates with 95% confidence intervals (CI) and to compare countries in relation to risk of revision for any reason. Results — After 2010, the increase in incidence of knee arthroplasty plateaued in Sweden and Denmark but contin-ued to increase in Finland and Norway. In 2017 the incidence was highest in Finland with 226 per 105 person-years, while it was less than 150 per 105 in the 3 other Nordic coun-tries. In total knee arthroplasties performed for osteoarthri-tis (OA), overall CRR at 15 years for revision due to any reason was higher in Denmark (CRR 9.6%, 95% CI 9.2−10), Norway (CRR 9.1%, CI 8.7−9.5), and Finland (CRR 7.0%, CI 6.8−7.3) compared with Sweden (CRR 6.6%, CI 6.4−6.8). There were differences among the countries in use of implant brand and type, fixation, patellar component, and use of unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. Interpretation — We evinced a slowing growth of incidence of knee arthroplasties in the Nordic countries after 2010 with Finland having the highest incidence. We also noted substantial differences among the 4 Nordic countries, with Sweden having a lower risk of revision than the other countries. No impact of NARA could be demonstrated and CRR did not improve over time.

AlkuperäiskieliEnglanti
Sivut866-873
Sivumäärä8
JulkaisuActa Orthopaedica
Vuosikerta93
DOI - pysyväislinkit
TilaJulkaistu - 2022
OKM-julkaisutyyppiA1 Alkuperäisartikkeli tieteellisessä aikakauslehdessä

Rahoitus

country were: the Danish Data protection agency (1-16-02-54-17), Denmark, the National Institute of Health and Welfare (Dnro THL/1743/.5.05.00/2014), Finland, the Norwegian Data Inspectorate (ref 24.1.2017: 16/01622-3/CDG), Norway and the Ethics Board of Lund University (LU20-02), Sweden. This work was supported by the competitive research funds of Pir-kanmaa Hospital District, Tampere, Finland, representing governmental funding. The authors have no conflicts of interests

Julkaisufoorumi-taso

  • Jufo-taso 1

!!ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Surgery
  • Yleinen lääketiede

Sormenjälki

Sukella tutkimusaiheisiin 'Impact of the Nordic Arthroplasty Register Association (NARA) collaboration on demographics, methods and revision rates in knee arthroplasty: a register-based study from NARA 2000–2017'. Ne muodostavat yhdessä ainutlaatuisen sormenjäljen.

Siteeraa tätä