Table 4.

Cox regression results ^a for cemented prosthesis brand combinations inserted 1987–1997 with follow-up until 2007 (n = 24,728)

	0–20-year follow-up				Revision %			6–10-year follow-up			11–20-year follow-up
Cause of revision Prosthesis	No. revised	RR	95% CI	p-value	8-year	18-year	95% CI	No. revised	RR	p-value	No. revised	RR	p-value
All causes
Charnley	1,141	1			5.3	12	11–13	406	1		242	1
Exeter	330	0.9	0.8–1.1	0.3	3.9	12	10–15	102	0.8	0.1	124	1.4	0.02
Titan	146	0.7	0.6–0.8	< 0.001	3.0	9.7	7.2–12	51	0.7	0.01	39	1.0	1.0
Spectron/ITH	135	0.8	0.7–1.0	0.02	2.2	11	9.3–14	49	0.8	0.2	67	1.7	< 0.001
IP/SP (I, II) b	8	0.3	0.1–0.6	< 0.001	1.6	c	c	1	0.1	0.02	2	0.3	0.1
Aseptic loosening
Charnley	851	1			3.6	8.6	7.8–9.5	340	1		203	1
Exeter	219	0.8	0.6–1.0	0.03	2.1	8.8	6.9–11	74	0.7	0.01	96	1.3	0.1
Titan	100	0.7	0.5–0.8	< 0.001	1.8	6.8	5.1–8.9	43	0.7	0.02	32	1.0	1.0
Spectron/ITH	119	0.9	0.7–1.1	0.4	1.7	9.7	7.8–12	46	0.9	0.5	62	1.9	< 0.001
IP/SP (I, II) b	3	0.1	0.0–0.6	0.001	0.3	c	c	1	0.1	0.03	2	0.4	0.2
Aseptic loosening of cup
Charnley	417	1			1.4	4.5	3.9–5.2	152	1		136	1
Exeter	188	1.4	1.1–1.9	0.01	1.7	7.6	5.7–9.7	59	1.3	0.2	88	1.8	< 0.001
Titan	76	1.1	0.8–1.4	0.5	1.3	5.4	3.8–7.0	33	1.2	0.4	27	1.3	0.2
Spectron	90	1.4	1.1–1.8	0.003	0.9	7.5	5.7–9.2	33	1.5	0.05	53	2.4	< 0.001
IP b	2	0.2	0.1–0.8	0.03	0.3	c	c	1	0.3	0.2	1	0.3	0.3
Aseptic loosening of stem
Charnley	789	1			3.5	7.8	7.0–8.6	321	1	1	178	1
Exeter	106	0.4	0.3–0.5	< 0.001	1.1	3.9	2.7–5.1	35	0.3	< 0.001	40	0.5	0.002
Titan	63	0.5	0.4–0.6	< 0.001	1.2	4.0	2.9–5.2	26	0.5	< 0.001	21	0.7	0.2
ITH	59	0.5	0.4–0.6	< 0.001	1.3	4.1	3.0–5.3	25	0.5	< 0.001	24	0.8	0.3
SP (I, II)b	3	0.1	0.0–0.5	0.001	0.3	c	c	1	0.1	0.03	2	0.4	0.2

^a Revision rate ratios (RRs) and revision percentages with adjustment for sex, age, diagnosis, and cement brand.

^b Full brand name: Link IP/Lubinus SP I (n = 205) and Link IP/Lubinus SP II (n = 1,809).

^c Less than 50 prostheses at risk.