Literature DB >> 15687155

Backside wear of polyethylene tibial inserts: mechanism and magnitude of material loss.

Michael A Conditt1, Matthew T Thompson, Molly M Usrey, Sabir K Ismaily, Philip C Noble.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Wear of the underside of modular tibial inserts (backside wear) in total knee replacements has been reported by several authors. Although, for some implant designs, this phenomenon seems to contribute to osteolysis, the actual volume of material lost through wear of the backside surface has not been quantified. This study describes the results of computerized measurements of tibial inserts of one design known to be associated with a high prevalence of backside wear in situ.
METHODS: A series of retrieved total knee components of one design were examined. The duration of implantation of the retrieved components ranged from thirty-six to 146 months. Laser surface profilometry and computer-aided design software were used to develop individual three-dimensional models of each worn, retrieved tibial insert to compare with scanned unused inserts. Volumetric subtraction of both models revealed the material lost because of backside wear.
RESULTS: Worn and unworn areas on the backside surface were easily identified by stereomicroscopy and laser profilometry. The computer reconstructions showed that, in all retrievals, all unworn surfaces on the nonarticulating surface lay in one plane. The average volume (and standard deviation) of the material lost because of backside wear was 925 +/- 637 mm(3) (range, 197 to 2720 mm(3)). On the basis of the time in situ for each implant, the average volumetric wear rate was 138 +/- 95 mm(3)/yr.
CONCLUSIONS: The predicted volume of material removed because of backside wear is substantial and may be sufficient to induce osteolysis. Our results suggest that peg-like protrusions are not generated by the extrusion of polyethylene into screw-holes within the base-plate but by abrasion of the underside of the bearing insert, leaving the protruding pegs as the only remnants of the original surface.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2005        PMID: 15687155     DOI: 10.2106/JBJS.C.01308

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am        ISSN: 0021-9355            Impact factor:   5.284


  24 in total

1.  Knee wear measured in retrievals: a polished tray reduces insert wear.

Authors:  Daniel J Berry; John H Currier; Michael B Mayor; John P Collier
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2012-07       Impact factor: 4.176

2.  CORR Insights(®): Backside Wear Is Not Dependent on the Acetabular Socket Design in Crosslinked Polyethylene Liners.

Authors:  Christophe Nich
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2015-08-11       Impact factor: 4.176

3.  Finite element analysis: a comparison of an all-polyethylene tibial implant and its metal-backed equivalent.

Authors:  S M Thompson; D Yohuno; W N Bradley; A D Crocombe
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2015-12-22       Impact factor: 4.342

4.  Hybrid total knee arthroplasty: 13-year survivorship of AGC total knee systems with average 7 years followup.

Authors:  Philip M Faris; E Michael Keating; Alex Farris; John B Meding; Merrill A Ritter
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2008-03-07       Impact factor: 4.176

5.  How do CAD models compare with reverse engineered manufactured components for use in wear analysis?

Authors:  Matthew G Teeter; Douglas D R Naudie; Robert B Bourne; David W Holdsworth
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2012-07       Impact factor: 4.176

6.  Highly crosslinked polyethylene is safe for use in total knee arthroplasty.

Authors:  Jeffrey T Hodrick; Erik P Severson; Deborah S McAlister; Brian Dahl; Aaron A Hofmann
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2008-09-10       Impact factor: 4.176

7.  A pictographic atlas for classifying damage modes on polyethylene bearings.

Authors:  Melinda Harman; Luca Cristofolini; Paolo Erani; Susanna Stea; Marco Viceconti
Journal:  J Mater Sci Mater Med       Date:  2011-04-02       Impact factor: 3.896

8.  Can microcomputed tomography measure retrieved polyethylene wear? Comparing fixed-bearing and rotating-platform knees.

Authors:  Charles A Engh; Rebecca L Zimmerman; Robert H Hopper; Gerard A Engh
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2013-01       Impact factor: 4.176

9.  Current Total Knee Designs: Does Baseplate Roughness or Locking Mechanism Design Affect Polyethylene Backside Wear?

Authors:  Zachary W Sisko; Matthew G Teeter; Brent A Lanting; James L Howard; Richard W McCalden; Douglas D Naudie; Steven J MacDonald; Edward M Vasarhelyi
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2017-09-13       Impact factor: 4.176

10.  The INDUS knee prosthesis - Prospective multicentric trial of a posteriorly stabilized high-flex design: 2 years follow-up.

Authors:  Kantilal H Sancheti; Nandu S Laud; Harish Bhende; Gurava Reddy; Neema Pramod; Joseph N Mani
Journal:  Indian J Orthop       Date:  2009-10       Impact factor: 1.251

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.