Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 333

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

ANTIBIOTIC PROPHYLAXIS IN TOTAL HIP ARTHROPLASTY: REVIEW OF 10 905 PRIMARY CEMENTED TOTAL HIP REPLACEMENTS REPORTED TO THE NORWEGIAN ARTHROPLASTY REGISTER, 1987 TO 1995

Open access
Espehaug, B., Engesaeter, L. B., Vollset, S. E., Havelin, L. I., Langeland, N.·1997·The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery. British volume

Abstract

We have assessed the effect of different regimes of antibiotic prophylaxis on the survival of total hip implants, comparing antibiotics administered both systemically and in the bone cement, systemically only, in the bone cement only and with no antibiotics given. We studied 10 905 primary cemented total hip replacements, performed for osteoarthritis of the hip and reported to the Norwegian arthroplasty register between 1987 and 1995. Cox-estimated failure-rate ratios (FRR) are presented with adjustment for gender, age, the brand of cement, the prosthesis, the type of operating theatre and the operating time. For revisions performed for infection (39 operations), the lowest rate of revision was found among patients receiving antibiotic-containing cement plus systemic antibiotics (n = 5804). The revision rate for the 4586 patients receiving systemic antibiotics only was 4.3 times greater (95% CI 1.7 to 11.0, p = 0.001); in 239 with antibiotics in the bone cement only it was 6.3 times greater (CI 1.6 to 25.0, p = 0.003); and in the 276 who did not receive antibiotics it was by 11.5 times greater (CI 2.1 to 63.0, p = 0.002). Adjustment for the total amount of systemic antibiotic administered did not change the results. We also observed an increased revision rate for aseptic loosening (109 operations) comparing the systemic-only (FRR = 1.8, CI 1.1 to 2.9, p = 0.01) and the cement-only regimes (FRR = 2.6, CI 1.2 to 5.9, p = 0.02) with the combined dosage. Our findings show that systemic antibiotics combined with antibiotic-containing bone cement led to fewer revisions than the other methods.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1302/0301-620x.79b4.0790590

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Cited by

See all 333

Metadata

Authors
Espehaug, B., Engesaeter, L. B., Vollset, S. E., Havelin, L. I., & Langeland, N.
Venue
The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery. British volume
Published
1997-07
Volume
79-B
Issue
4
Pages
590-595
ISSN
  • 0301-620X (ISSN-L)
  • 2044-5377
OpenAlex
W2024537602
Cited by
333
References
1
FWCI
6.04
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: ANTIBIOTIC PROPHYLAXIS IN TOTAL HIP ARTHROPLASTY: REVIEW OF 10 905 PRIMARY CEMENTED TOTAL HIP REPLACEMENTS REPORTED TO THE NORWEGIAN ARTHROPLASTY REGISTER, 1987 TO 1995. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1302/0301-620x.79b4.0790590
The paper
Espehaug, B., Engesaeter, L. B., Vollset, S. E., Havelin, L. I., & Langeland, N. (1997). ANTIBIOTIC PROPHYLAXIS IN TOTAL HIP ARTHROPLASTY: REVIEW OF 10 905 PRIMARY CEMENTED TOTAL HIP REPLACEMENTS REPORTED TO THE NORWEGIAN ARTHROPLASTY REGISTER, 1987 TO 1995. The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery. British volume. https://doi.org/10.1302/0301-620x.79b4.0790590

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.