Literature DB >> 23861047

Short-term wear evaluation of thin acetabular liners on 36-mm femoral heads.

Aaron J Johnson1, LaQuawn Loving, Lizeth Herrera, Ronald E Delanois, Aiguo Wang, Michael A Mont.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Dislocation remains the leading cause of revision THA. One approach to decreasing prosthetic dislocation risk has been the use of larger femoral head component sizes. The upper limit of head size in metal-on-polyethylene hip arthroplasty has historically been limited because of concerns about increased wear on thin polyethylene components. It is not known to what degree this concern should apply to more wear-resistant polyethylene components. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: We therefore determined (1) in vitro wear rates of polyethylene liners of varying thicknesses, (2) whether there were differences in the microscopic wear characteristics as a function of polyethylene thickness, and (3) whether thin polyethylene components resulted in early catastrophic failures.
METHODS: We used a hip wear simulator to compare the wear performance of 12 highly crosslinked polyethylene acetabular inserts. The internal diameter of all components was 36 mm, and there were three samples tested of each thickness (1.9, 3.9, 5.9, or 7.9 mm). Testing was conducted for 2.4 million cycles. Gravimetric mass loss was converted to volumetric loss, which was subsequently converted to theoretical linear penetration rates.
RESULTS: Wear rates decreased with increasing polyethylene thickness. Mean ± SD wear rates for the 1.9-, 3.9-, 5.9-, and 7.9-mm groups were 5.0 ± 0.5, 3.2 ± 0.3, 2.5 ± 1.1, and 2.2 ± 1.3 mm(3)/million cycles, respectively (p < 0.016). Calculated penetration rates were 0.015, 0.012, 0.011, and 0.010 mm/million cycles, respectively (p < 0.016). There were no catastrophic failures in any group.
CONCLUSIONS: Thinner polyethylene components demonstrated higher wear rates, although even the highest wear rate observed in the thinnest polyethylene specimen was lower than that commonly reported for noncrosslinked polyethylene components. While encouraging, these findings should be validated in vivo before clinical recommendations can be made.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2014        PMID: 23861047      PMCID: PMC3890177          DOI: 10.1007/s11999-013-3153-x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res        ISSN: 0009-921X            Impact factor:   4.176


  28 in total

Review 1.  Dislocation after total hip arthroplasty: implant design and orientation.

Authors:  Robert L Barrack
Journal:  J Am Acad Orthop Surg       Date:  2003 Mar-Apr       Impact factor: 3.020

Review 2.  Instability after total hip arthroplasty.

Authors:  B F Morrey
Journal:  Orthop Clin North Am       Date:  1992-04       Impact factor: 2.472

3.  Rim cracking of the cross-linked longevity polyethylene acetabular liner after total hip arthroplasty.

Authors:  Stephen S Tower; John H Currier; Barbara H Currier; Kimberly A Lyford; Douglas W Van Citters; Michael B Mayor
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am       Date:  2007-10       Impact factor: 5.284

4.  Future clinical and economic impact of revision total hip and knee arthroplasty.

Authors:  Steven M Kurtz; Kevin L Ong; Jordana Schmier; Fionna Mowat; Khaled Saleh; Eva Dybvik; Johan Kärrholm; Göran Garellick; Leif I Havelin; Ove Furnes; Henrik Malchau; Edmund Lau
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am       Date:  2007-10       Impact factor: 5.284

5.  Relationship of femoral head and acetabular size to the prevalence of dislocation.

Authors:  S S Kelley; P F Lachiewicz; J M Hickman; S M Paterno
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  1998-10       Impact factor: 4.176

6.  Dislocations and the femoral head size in primary total hip arthroplasty.

Authors:  U Hedlundh; L Ahnfelt; C H Hybbinette; L Wallinder; J Weckström; H Fredin
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  1996-12       Impact factor: 4.176

7.  The effect of conformity, thickness, and material on stresses in ultra-high molecular weight components for total joint replacement.

Authors:  D L Bartel; V L Bicknell; T M Wright
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am       Date:  1986-09       Impact factor: 5.284

8.  Dislocations after total hip-replacement arthroplasties.

Authors:  G E Lewinnek; J L Lewis; R Tarr; C L Compere; J R Zimmerman
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am       Date:  1978-03       Impact factor: 5.284

Review 9.  Instability following total hip arthroplasty.

Authors:  Hargovind DeWal; Edward Su; Paul E DiCesare
Journal:  Am J Orthop (Belle Mead NJ)       Date:  2003-08

10.  Catastrophic failure of the polyethylene liner of uncemented acetabular components.

Authors:  D J Berry; C L Barnes; R D Scott; M E Cabanela; R Poss
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Br       Date:  1994-07
View more
  12 in total

1.  [Supramacroparticulate polyethylene in inflammation of synovial-like interface membranes: Characterization and suggested nomenclature].

Authors:  V Krenn; F Hopf; P Thomas; M Thomsen; S Usbeck; F Boettner; S Müller; D Saberi; T Hügle; M Huber; L Scheuber; J C Hopf; J P Kretzer
Journal:  Orthopade       Date:  2016-03       Impact factor: 1.087

2.  Wear testing of a canine hip resurfacing implant that uses highly cross-linked polyethylene.

Authors:  Kevin J Warburton; John B Everingham; Jillian L Helms; Andrew J Kazanovicz; Katherine A Hollar; Jeff D Brourman; Steven M Fox; Trevor J Lujan
Journal:  J Orthop Res       Date:  2017-11-14       Impact factor: 3.494

3.  A Liner Breakage in Total Hip Arthroplasty after Using 1st Generation Highly Cross Linked Polyethylene Mated against 36-mm Metal Head: A Case Report.

Authors:  Won-Kee Choi; Myung-Rae Cho; Seung-Bum Chae; Dong-Young Kim
Journal:  Hip Pelvis       Date:  2015-09-30

4.  Results of Primary Total Hip Arthroplasty Using 36 mm Femoral Heads on 1st Generation Highly Cross Linked Polyethylene in Patients 50 Years and Less with Minimum Five Year Follow-up.

Authors:  Won-Kee Choi; Myung-Rae Cho; Hee-Soo Kim; Jun-Ho Nam; Seung-Bum Chae
Journal:  Hip Pelvis       Date:  2016-06-30

5.  Outcome of Ceramic-on-Ceramic Total Hip Arthroplasty with 4th Generation 36 mm Head Compared to that with 3rd Generation 28 mm Head by Propensity Score Matching.

Authors:  Soong Joon Lee; Kang Sup Yoon
Journal:  Indian J Orthop       Date:  2020-09-02       Impact factor: 1.251

6.  Low failure rate at short term for 40 mm heads and second generation triple annealed HCLPE liners in hybrid hip replacements.

Authors:  Rajkumar Thangaraj; Jan Kuiper; Ralph D Perkins
Journal:  J Clin Orthop Trauma       Date:  2018-01-03

Review 7.  Personalized Hip Joint Replacement with Large Diameter Head: Current Concepts.

Authors:  Pascal-André Vendittoli; Sagi Martinov; Mina Wahba Morcos; Sivan Sivaloganathan; William G Blakeney
Journal:  J Clin Med       Date:  2022-03-30       Impact factor: 4.241

8.  Static structural analysis of different stem designs used in total hip arthroplasty using finite element method.

Authors:  Chethan K N; Mohammad Zuber; Shyamasunder Bhat N; Satish Shenoy B; Chandrakant R Kini
Journal:  Heliyon       Date:  2019-06-12

9.  Analysis of the Risk of Wear on Cemented and Uncemented Polyethylene Liners According to Different Variables in Hip Arthroplasty.

Authors:  Basilio De la Torre; Loreto Barrios; Juan De la Torre-Mosquera; Julia Bujan; Miguel A Ortega; Carlos González-Bravo
Journal:  Materials (Basel)       Date:  2021-11-27       Impact factor: 3.623

10.  Finite Element Analysis of Different Hip Implant Designs along with Femur under Static Loading Conditions.

Authors:  Chethan K N; Shyamasunder Bhat N; Zuber M; Satish Shenoy B
Journal:  J Biomed Phys Eng       Date:  2019-10-01
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.