PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to compare the results of revision total hip arthroplasty after fracture of primary ceramic components using different type of revision bearing surfaces. METHODS: We analysed the results of 16 patients with a follow-up more than 3 years after first revision. 6 were revised to ceramic-on-ceramic (CoC) bearing, 9 to metal-on-polyethylene (MoP) and 1 to ceramic-on-cross-linked polyethylene (CoXLP) bearing. RESULTS: The mean follow-up was 87 months. Patients with revision to CoC had higher Harris Hip Score (HHS) of 89 points in comparison to the patients with revision to MoP with 84 points. Radiographic examinations revealed visible eccentric polyethylene wear with osteolysis in 3 out of 9 patients revised to MoP. There were no detrimental x-ray changes in patients revised to CoC components. CONCLUSIONS: We consider CoC as the best option at revision operation for ceramic component fracture.
PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to compare the results of revision total hip arthroplasty after fracture of primary ceramic components using different type of revision bearing surfaces. METHODS: We analysed the results of 16 patients with a follow-up more than 3 years after first revision. 6 were revised to ceramic-on-ceramic (CoC) bearing, 9 to metal-on-polyethylene (MoP) and 1 to ceramic-on-cross-linked polyethylene (CoXLP) bearing. RESULTS: The mean follow-up was 87 months. Patients with revision to CoC had higher Harris Hip Score (HHS) of 89 points in comparison to the patients with revision to MoP with 84 points. Radiographic examinations revealed visible eccentric polyethylene wear with osteolysis in 3 out of 9 patients revised to MoP. There were no detrimental x-ray changes in patients revised to CoC components. CONCLUSIONS: We consider CoC as the best option at revision operation for ceramic component fracture.