Literature DB >> 8769320

Metal on metal bearings in hip arthroplasty.

H C Amstutz1, P Grigoris.   

Abstract

Periprosthetic osteolysis caused by wear debris released from the bearing surface of polyethylene components is the major problem in contemporary hip arthroplasty. Several types of metal on metal prostheses were developed in the 1960s, but by the mid 1970s they were completely displaced by polyethylene bearings. There have been several generations of all metal components with significant variation in design, tolerances, and bearing surface quality. A number of these hips have survived for more than 25 years because of low wear rates and minimal osteolysis. Identification of the characteristics that contributed to long term function is important. The historical development and clinical results of metal on metal hip arthroplasties are presented. Factors that led to the abandonment of the metal on metal bearings are related to: (1) the early success of the Charnley prosthesis; (2) the frictional torque issue; (3) carcinogenesis concerns; (4) metal sensitivity concerns; (5) high infection rates; and (6) increased strain rates in periprosthetic bone and fatigue fractures of the acetabular floor. The accumulated experience to date enables one to evaluate all the factors with a different perspective and makes the use of newer metal on metal bearings a viable option in younger patients.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1996        PMID: 8769320     DOI: 10.1097/00003086-199608001-00003

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


  28 in total

1.  Factors to consider in joint prosthesis systems.

Authors:  Larry M Wolford
Journal:  Proc (Bayl Univ Med Cent)       Date:  2006-07

2.  The Birmingham Hip Resurfacing: 5-year clinical and radiographic results from a District General Hospital.

Authors:  B Ollivere; S Duckett; A August; M Porteous
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2009-06-09       Impact factor: 3.075

3.  Edge-loading severity as a function of cup lip radius in metal-on-metal total hips--a finite element analysis.

Authors:  Jacob M Elkins; Karen M Kruger; Douglas R Pedersen; John J Callaghan; Thomas D Brown
Journal:  J Orthop Res       Date:  2011-08-02       Impact factor: 3.494

4.  Improved adhesion of ultra-hard carbon films on cobalt-chromium orthopaedic implant alloy.

Authors:  Shane A Catledge; Rishi Vaid; Patrick Diggins; Jeffrey J Weimer; Mark Koopman; Yogesh K Vohra
Journal:  J Mater Sci Mater Med       Date:  2011-01-08       Impact factor: 3.896

Review 5.  Metallic debris from metal-on-metal total hip arthroplasty regulates periprosthetic tissues.

Authors:  Christoph H Lohmann; Gurpal Singh; Hans-Georg Willert; Gottfried H Buchhorn
Journal:  World J Orthop       Date:  2014-11-18

6.  CORR Insights®: can wear explain the histological variation around metal-on-metal total hips?

Authors:  McKinley C Lawson
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2014-09-23       Impact factor: 4.176

7.  In vitro studies on the effect of particle size on macrophage responses to nanodiamond wear debris.

Authors:  Vinoy Thomas; Brian A Halloran; Namasivayam Ambalavanan; Shane A Catledge; Yogesh K Vohra
Journal:  Acta Biomater       Date:  2012-02-02       Impact factor: 8.947

8.  Metal on metal hip resurfacing versus uncemented custom total hip replacement--early results.

Authors:  Nemandra A Sandiford; Sarah K Muirhead-Allwood; John A Skinner; Jia Hua
Journal:  J Orthop Surg Res       Date:  2010-02-18       Impact factor: 2.359

9.  Patients report improvement in quality of life and satisfaction after hip resurfacing arthroplasty.

Authors:  Wael A Rahman; Nelson V Greidanus; Alexander Siegmeth; Bassam A Masri; Clive P Duncan; Donald S Garbuz
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2013-02       Impact factor: 4.176

Review 10.  [Development of hip resurfacing].

Authors:  H Rechl; H Pilge; M Rudert
Journal:  Orthopade       Date:  2008-07       Impact factor: 1.087

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.