Copyright
©The Author(s) 2017.
World J Orthop. Dec 18, 2017; 8(12): 946-955
Published online Dec 18, 2017. doi: 10.5312/wjo.v8.i12.946
Published online Dec 18, 2017. doi: 10.5312/wjo.v8.i12.946
Paper | Comparison |
Chiu et al[18], 2001 | Cefuroxime-impregnated cement vs PBC |
Vrabec et al[23], 2016 | Intravenous tobramycin vs AIBC with tobramycin |
Chiu et al[19], 2002 | Cefuroxime-impregnated cement vs PBC |
Lizaur-Utrilla et al[24], 2014 | Tibial fixation with either a cemented (Palacos with Gentamicin) vs cementless with screw augmentation (systemic antibiotics only) |
Nilsson et al[25], 1999 | Vacuum mixed bone cement (Palacos–Gentamicin) vs hydroxyapatite-coated prostheses |
Bercovy et al[26], 2012 | Hydroxyapatite-coated prostheses vs cemented (Refobacin) tibial components |
Hinarejos et al[20], 2013 | Simplex P cement loaded with 0.5 g of erythromycin and three million units of colistin in 40 g of cement (Stryker) vs simplex cement without antibiotic |
McQueen et al[22], 1987 | Cefuroxime in bone cement (1.5 g of cefuroxime powder was added to 40 g of CMW cement powder) vs systemic (1.5 g) cefuroxime |
McQueen et al[21], 1990 | Cefuroxime in bone cement (1.5 g of cefuroxime powder was added to 40 g of CMW cement powder) vs systemic (1.5 g) cefuroxime |
- Citation: Kleppel D, Stirton J, Liu J, Ebraheim NA. Antibiotic bone cement’s effect on infection rates in primary and revision total knee arthroplasties. World J Orthop 2017; 8(12): 946-955
- URL: https://www.wjgnet.com/2218-5836/full/v8/i12/946.htm
- DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.5312/wjo.v8.i12.946