Skip to main content
Advertisement
Browse Subject Areas
?

Click through the PLOS taxonomy to find articles in your field.

For more information about PLOS Subject Areas, click here.

< Back to Article

Fig 1.

Patient population and exclusions from the study.

More »

Fig 1 Expand

Table 1.

ICD codes included in analysis.

More »

Table 1 Expand

Table 2.

Characteristics of final groups of primary hip replacement (n = 403,881) for analysis by bearing type.

More »

Table 2 Expand

Fig 2.

Cumulative risk of a new diagnosis of any type of cancer following primary hip replacement by bearing type with numbers at risk shown.

More »

Fig 2 Expand

Table 3.

Hazard Rate Ratios (HRR) for being diagnosed with any type of cancer according to bearing type following primary hip replacement in men (n = 163,111; 14,825 were subsequently diagnosed with cancer) and women (n = 240,765; 17,040 were subsequently diagnosed with cancer).

More »

Table 3 Expand

Table 4.

Sub-hazard Rate Ratios (SHR) for being diagnosed with any type of cancer according to bearing type following primary hip replacement in men (n = 163,111; 14,825 were subsequently diagnosed with cancer; 9,524 ‘competing’ deaths) and women (n = 240,765; 17,040 were subsequently diagnosed with cancer; 13,999 ‘competing’ deaths).

More »

Table 4 Expand

Table 5.

Hazard Rate Ratios (HRR) with: (i) 1:1 matching for being diagnosed with any type of cancer following stemmed MoM in men (a: n = 17,450; 1,879 were subsequently diagnosed with cancer) and women (c: n = 16,930; 1,437 were subsequently diagnosed with cancer), and MoM hip resurfacings in men (b: n = 23,722; 1,529 were subsequently diagnosed with cancer) and women (d: n = 10,672; 704 were subsequently diagnosed with cancer).

(ii) 1:4 matching for being diagnosed with any type of cancer following stemmed MoM in men (a: n = 41,000; 4,462 were subsequently diagnosed with cancer) and women (c: n = 41,815; 3,704 were subsequently diagnosed with cancer), and MoM hip resurfacings in men (b: n = 38,350; 2,684 were subsequently diagnosed with cancer) and women (d: n = 20,425; 1,375 were subsequently diagnosed with cancer).

More »

Table 5 Expand

Table 6.

Cox proportional hazards regression models of the relative effects on time to cancer diagnosis of the bearing types of a second (contralateral) primary hip replacement, for patients who received stemmed non-MoM THR (other) at first primary in men (n = 141,179; 13,076 were subsequently diagnosed with cancer) and women (n = 259,858; 15,958 were subsequently diagnosed with cancer).

More »

Table 6 Expand

Table 7.

Cox proportional hazards regression models of the risk of being diagnosed with a haematological cancer following primary hip replacement by bearing type for men (n = 163,111; 2,109 were subsequently diagnosed with a haematological cancer) and women (n = 240,765; 2,953 were subsequently diagnosed with a haematological cancer).

More »

Table 7 Expand

Table 8.

Cox proportional hazards regression models of the risk of being diagnosed with malignant melanoma following primary hip replacement by bearing type for men (n = 163,111; 576 were subsequently diagnosed with malignant melanoma) and women (n = 240,765; 596 were subsequently diagnosed with malignant melanoma).

More »

Table 8 Expand

Table 9.

Cox proportional hazards regression models of the risk of being diagnosed with a urinary tract cancer following primary hip replacement by bearing type for men (n = 163,111; 1,849 were subsequently diagnosed with a urinary tract cancer) and women (n = 240,765; 1,078 were subsequently diagnosed with a urinary tract cancer).

More »

Table 9 Expand

Table 10.

Cox proportional hazards regression models of the risk of being diagnosed with prostate cancer following primary hip replacement by bearing type for men (n = 163,111; 4,061 were subsequently diagnosed with prostate cancer).

More »

Table 10 Expand