Is There a Difference in Revision Risk Between Metal and Ceramic Heads on Highly Crosslinked Polyethylene Liners?

Can Dual Mobility Cups Reduce Revision and Dislocation Risks? An Analysis of 107,528 Primary Total Hip Arthroplasties in the United States

BACKGROUND

Dual mobility acetabular cups (DMC) were designed to increase the effective femoral head size and improve stability with the goal of reducing revision risk at the potential cost of polyethylene thickness. We sought to evaluate revision risk following primary elective total hip arthroplasty with DMC compared to highly cross-linked polyethylene (XLPE).

METHODS

A cohort study was conducted using data from a Kaiser Permanente's total joint arthroplasty registry. Patients ≥18 years who underwent primary elective total hip arthroplasty using DMC, unipolar Metal-on-XLPE (MoXLPE), or unipolar Ceramic-on-XLPE (CoXLPE) were identified (2010 to 2021). The final sample comprised 2,219 DMC, 48,251 MoXLPE, and 57,058 CoXLPE. Multiple Cox proportional hazard regressions were used to evaluate aseptic revision and any dislocation regardless of revision within 6 years follow-up.

RESULTS

In adjusted analyses, no differences in aseptic revision risk were observed for MoXLPE (hazard ratio [HR] = 1.04, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.72 to 1.51) or CoXLPE (HR = 0.98, 95% CI = 0.69 to 1.40) compared to DMC. No differences in dislocation risk were observed for MoXLPE (HR = 1.42, 95% CI = 0.93 to 2.15) or CoXLPE (HR = 1.25, 95% CI = 0.84 to 1.87) compared to DMC.

CONCLUSIONS

In a US-based cohort, 6-year aseptic revision risk of DMC was similar to metal or ceramic femoral head unipolar constructs. Furthermore, no difference in dislocation risk was observed. Continued longer-term follow-up may reveal if there is a reduced risk of dislocation that comes at the cost of increased late revision.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III.

Role of femoral head material on readmission and mortality rates following elective primary total hip arthroplasty in Medicare patients

INTRODUCTION

The role of different femoral head materials for total hip arthroplasty (THA) has been widely studied in the context of wear properties and corrosion. Cobalt chrome (CoCr) femoral heads are commonly used as a standard of comparison to other materials such as ceramic and oxidized zirconium (OxZi). This study aims to evaluate the impact of femoral head material on clinical outcomes in elective primary THA patients.

METHODS

Retrospective analysis of THA patients within the Medicare claims database between October 2017 and September 2020 using diagnosis-related group codes was conducted. Information collected included sex, age, Charlson Comorbidity Index, and femoral head type. Patients with CoCr femoral heads were compared against patients with either OxZi or ceramic femoral heads using 1:1 propensity score matching. Z-testing and Chi-square analysis were used to determine between-group significance.

RESULTS

In total, 112,960 elective THA patients were included, with 56,480 in OxZi or ceramic and 56,480 in CoCr. Readmission rates were lower in patients that received OxZi or ceramic femoral heads at 30-day (p < 0.0001), 60-day (p < 0.0001), and 90-day postoperatively (p < 0.0001) compared to CoCr. Mortality rates were also lower in patients that received OxZi or ceramic femoral heads at 30-day (p = 0.004), 60-day (p = 0.018), and 90-day postoperatively (p = 0.009) compared to CoCr.

CONCLUSION

CoCr femoral heads had higher rates of readmissions and mortality compared to OxZi or ceramic. Further analysis of bearing surface combinations and sub-group analyses to determine significance between-group differences is needed.

LEVEL III EVIDENCE

Retrospective analysis.

Highly crosslinked polyethylene liner thickness does not influence survival in primary total hip arthroplasty after mean follow-up of 13 years: a study of 2,565 hips with a single design liner

BACKGROUND

Concerns remain that thinner highly crosslinked polyethylene (HXLPE) liners in modern total hip arthroplasty (THA) may lead to premature liner-related failures or revision. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of liner-thickness on survival and revision rates of HXLPE in primary THA after more than 10 years.

METHODS

We retrospectively identified 2,565 primary THA using HXLPE with a mean follow-up of 13 years (range, 11 to 19). Patients were grouped for each millimeter (mm) of polyethylene thickness. Liner thickness varied from 4.9 to 12.7 mm, with one third measuring less than 6 mm. Primary outcomes were reoperation, all-cause revision, and liner-related revision.

RESULTS

The reoperation rate was 7.3%, the all-cause revision rate was 5.6%, and the liner-related revision rate was 0.04%. There was no significant difference in all-cause revision when stratified by liner thickness (P=0.286) and liner thickness was not associated with liner-related revision (n=1). There was a statistically, but not clinically significant difference in mean liner thickness for the cohort that underwent reoperation (7.09 vs 6.89 mm, P=0.01) and all-cause revision (7.16 vs 6.89 mm, P=0.031).

CONCLUSION

In our cohort, liner thickness was not associated with all-cause revision-free survival and there was no clinically significant difference in liner thickness between those patients who did require a reoperation or all-cause revision, and those who did not. There was only 1 liner related failure in the entire cohort. Our results indicate that using thinner HXPE liners to maximize femoral head size in THA is a safe practice that does not lead to increased revision rates or liner failure at a mean 13 years follow-up.

Analysis of biomechanical gait parameters in patients after total hip replacement operated via anterolateral approach depending on size of the femoral head implant: retrospective matched-cohort study

INTRODUCTION

Total hip replacement (THR) is considered one of the most effective medical procedures in treatment of osteoarthritis. Since its introduction, there has been a worldwide debate over proper implant selection in terms of size, bearing type and shape. Following study was designed to assess the importance of femoral head size in long-term follow-up.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A cohort of 30 patients with primary end stage osteoarthritis who underwent total hip replacement was analysed retrospectively. A homogenous group was chosen with no major differences in BMI. Patients' gait parameters were measured in a biomechanics laboratory using the 3D BTS Smart system. WOMAC and VAS questionnaires were used to assess patient reported outcome.

RESULTS

The subgroup with larger implant head size had several outcomes significantly superior to the subgroup with standard head size and non-inferior to healthy hips. Following variables were measured during this study: time of support phase, time of swing phase, double support time, walking hip extension angle.

CONCLUSIONS

Use of larger sized femoral heads during THR gives better results in terms of gait pattern. Since restoring the gait pattern is one of the aspects of rehabilitation and returning to daily activities it seems to be an important observation.

Lower Rates of Ceramic Femoral Head Use in Non-White Patients in the United States, a National Registry Study

BACKGROUND

The purpose of our study was to investigate the association of race and ethnicity with the use of the newest technology and postoperative outcomes in total hip arthroplasty (THA) using the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons (AAOS) American Joint Replacement Registry (AJRR).

METHODS

Adult THA procedures were queried from the AJRR from 2012 to 2020. A mixed-effects multivariate regression model was used to evaluate the association of race and ethnicity with the use of the newest technology (ceramic femoral head, dual-mobility implant, and robotic assist) at 30-day, and 90-day readmission. A proportional subdistribution hazard model was used to model a risk of revision THA.

RESULTS

There were 85,188 THAs with complete data for an analysis of outcomes and 103,218 for an analysis of ceramic head usage. The median length of follow-up was 37.9 months (interquartile range [IQR] 21.6 to 56.3 months). In multivariate models, compared to White non-Hispanic patients, Black (odds ratio [OR] 0.79, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.69-0.92, P < .001), Hispanic (OR 0.76, CI 0.59-0.99, P = .037), Asian (OR 0.74, CI 0.55-1.00, P = .045), and Native American (OR 0.52, CI 0.30-0.87, P = .004) patients all had significantly lower rates of ceramic head use in THA. Compared to White non-Hispanic patients, Asian (hazard ratio [HR] 0.39, CI 0.18-0.86, P = .008) and Hispanic (HR 0.43, CI 0.19-0.98, P = .043) patients had significantly lower rates of revision. No differences in 30-day or 90-day readmission rates were seen.

CONCLUSION

Black, Hispanic, Native American, and Asian patients had lower rates of ceramic head use in THA when compared to White patients. These differences did not translate into worse clinical outcomes on a short-term follow-up. In fact, Asian patients had lower revision rates compared to non-Hispanic White patients. Additional study is necessary to evaluate the long-term consequence of lower ceramic head use in non-White patients in the United States.

Hip stability parameters with dual mobility, modular dual mobility and fixed bearing in total hip arthroplasty: an analytical evaluation

Background

Use of dual mobility (DM) in total hip arthroplasty has gained popularity due to the ability to reduce dislocation through increased jumping distance and impingement-free arc of movement. Recently, modular dual mobility (modDM) systems were introduced to give the possibility to use DM with standard metal-backed shells, however few has been studied to date regarding how jumping distance and the center of rotation change with modDM. The objective of this study was to evaluate, through analytical simulation, how jumping distance, center of rotation and arc of movement change between DM and standard cups with modDM or fixed bearings (FB).

Methods

3D-models of DM and standard press-fit cups with modDM or FB liners were used to simulate DM, modDM and FB implant configurations, matched for same cup size, according to same cup position and different femoral head diameters. Jumping distance was calculated and center of rotation lateralization and oscillation angles were measured for each size of these three implant configurations.

Results

Jumping distance with modDM was reduced by -3.9 mm to -8.6 mm in comparison with DM, from 48 to 64 mm size, but resulted comparable to polyethylene 36 mm FB and increased by + 1.1 mm and + 1.4 mm than ceramic 36 and 40 mm FBs for sizes > 54 mm. ModDM lateralized the center of rotation up to + 2.5 mm and + 4.0 mm in comparison with DM and FBs, respectively. Oscillation angle with modDM resulted higher than + 16°, + 23°, + 17° and + 14° in comparison to DM, 28 mm, 32 mm and 36 mm FB cups, respectively, for 56 mm cup size.

Conclusions

According to its specific design, modDM might change hip stability parameters in comparison to DM, worsening jumping distance and center of rotation position, but increasing arc of movement. As not restoring stability parameters in the same fashion, modDM implants should be properly used when DM cups are not feasible.

[Tribology in hip arthroplasty : Benefits of different materials]

When it comes to total hip replacements, choosing the suitable material combination is of clinical relevance. The present review article examines the technical differences in wear and corrosion of the relevant material combinations of ceramics, metals, ceramized metals and various types of polyethylene. The material characteristics, which were often tested under standardized conditions in the laboratory, are compared with clinical results on the basis of evidence-graded clinical studies and on the basis of register studies. This article thus represents an up-to-date snapshot of the expectations and actual clinical outcomes of the present choice of material combinations. It shows that some tendencies from the field of materials research, e.g. with regard to cross-linked polyethylene, coincide with observations from practical clinical experience, while for other materials, a proven technical superiority has not yet been confirmed as an evident advantage in clinical practice.

Polyethylene Wear With Ceramic and Metal Femoral Heads at 5 Years: A Randomized Controlled Trial With Radiostereometric Analysis

BACKGROUND

A common bearing combination in total hip arthroplasty today is a metal femoral head articulating with polyethylene in the cup. Ceramic heads are thought to be more resistant to third-body damage, and have better wettability and decreased surface roughness, which taken together have been suggested to result in less polyethylene wear. The purpose of this study is to compare the initial creep deformation and follow wear pattern, using radiostereometric analysis, of ceramic and metal femoral heads that articulate with a modern highly cross-linked polyethylene cup liner.

METHODS

Fifty patients with primary osteoarthritis and scheduled for an uncemented total hip arthroplasty were randomized 1:1 to either a ceramic (BIOLOX delta) or a metal (CoCr) femoral head. The patients were followed up for 5 years with repeated radiostereometric analysis examinations (postoperatively, then at 14 days, 3, 12, 24, and 60 months), as well as a hip-specific outcome questionnaire.

RESULTS

During the first 3 months both groups showed expected creep within the liner of 0.12 mm (standard deviation 0.03) for the ceramic and 0.08 mm (standard deviation 0.02) for the metal heads. Between 3 months and 5 years there was very little wear of the liner in either group, corresponding to 0.003 mm/y for ceramic and 0.007 mm/y for metal heads. There was no difference in cup migration or clinical outcome between the groups and no cups were revised.

CONCLUSION

With the introduction of modern highly cross-linked polyethylene, the ceramic head demonstrates no superiority when it comes to either early deformation or polyethylene wear compared with the metal head.

Three Femoral Stem Designs Without Corrosion: A Review of 2095 Stems

Introduction

Corrosion at the head-neck interface of modular components in total hip arthroplasty (THA) has been reported as a cause of failure of modern total hip replacement implants. While this method of failure has been well described, it remains poorly understood. The purpose of this study is to review the three most commonly used uncemented femoral stems at our institution over the last fifteen years and to correlate any established risk factors with rates of revision, particularly corrosion.

Methods

We reviewed 2095 patients from March 2000 to September 2015 who underwent total hip arthroplasty with one of three uncemented femoral stem designs. All stems were made of a Ti6Al4V alloy with a 12/14 taper design. We included only those stems coupled with a CoCr head and a highly crosslinked polyethylene liner. We evaluated age, gender, body mass index (BMI), femoral head size, head length, neck angle and offset and correlated these to the incidence of all cause revision, as well as revision excluding infection.

Results

There were no recognized corrosion-related revisions identified. There was no association between age, BMI, gender, head length, neck angle and offset to all cause revision or revision with infection excluded (p>0.05). Femoral head size less than 32mm was associated with higher all cause revision rates (OR 4.60 (95% CI 1.8, 11.8)) and when excluding infection as a reason for revision (OR 4.94 (95% CI 1.7, 14.41)).

Conclusion

Over the last fifteen years, we have not identified any cases of corrosion with the three most commonly used femoral stems used at out institution. While we acknowledge that no femoral stem is immune to corrosion, certain femoral stem designs may be uniquely resistant to this mode of failure.

Level of Evidence

III.

An international comparison of THA patients, implants, techniques, and survivorship in Sweden, Australia, and the United States

Background and purpose - International comparisons of total hip arthroplasty (THA) practices and outcomes provide an opportunity to enhance the quality of care worldwide. We compared THA patients, implants, techniques, and survivorship in Sweden, Australia, and the United States. Patients and methods - Primary THAs due to osteoarthritis were identified using Swedish (n = 159,695), Australian (n = 279,693), and US registries (n = 69,641) (2003-2015). We compared patients, practices, and implant usage across the countries using descriptive statistics. We evaluated time to all-cause revision using Kaplan-Meier survival curves. We assessed differences in countries' THA survival using chi-square tests of survival probabilities. Results - Sweden had fewer comorbidities than the United States and Australia. Cement fixation was used predominantly in Sweden and cementless in the United States and Australia. The direct anterior approach was used more frequently in the United States and Australia. Smaller head sizes (≤ 32 mm vs. ≥ 36 mm) were used more often in Sweden than the United States and Australia. Metal-on-highly cross-linked polyethylene was used more frequently in the United States and Australia than in Sweden. Sweden's 5- (97.8%) and 10-year THA survival (95.8%) was higher than the United States' (5-year: 97.0%; 10-year: 95.2%) and Australia (5-year: 96.3%; 10-year: 93.5%). Interpretation - Patient characteristics, surgical techniques, and implants differed across the 3 countries, emphasizing the need to adjust for demographics, surgical techniques, and implants and the need for global standardized definitions to compare THA survivorship internationally.

There Is No Significant Difference in Fretting and Corrosion at the Trunnion of Metal and Ceramic Heads

No study has compared the prevalence of fretting and corrosion at the trunnion of cobalt-chrome (Co-Cr) and zirconia ceramic heads in the same patients. The authors sought to compare the prevalence of fretting and corrosion at the trunnion after total hip arthroplasty with a 32-mm Co-Cr or a 32-mm zirconia ceramic head-on-polyethylene bearing. Isolated revision of the ace-tabular components was performed in 78 patients (156 hips) for polyethylene wear and osteolysis of the acetabulum. Seventy-eight Co-Cr head-titanium alloy stem pairs were compared with 78 zirconia ceramic head-titanium alloy stem pairs in the same patients. Using a visual scoring technique, the 156 head-stem pairs were analyzed for the prevalence of fretting and/or corrosion at the trunnion of the stem and the prevalence of metal transfer to the inner taper of the femoral head. Mean patient age was 48 years, and there were 65 men and 13 women. There was no trunnionosis in either group. Prevalence of fretting (81% vs 83%) and corrosion (4% vs 3%) at the trunnion was not significantly different (P=.518 vs .612, respectively) between the 2 groups. The median fretting scores (1.4±1.1 vs 1.2±1.4 points) and corrosion scores (1.2±0.8 vs 1.3±0.9 points) at the trunnion were not significantly different (P=.893 vs .781, respectively) between the 2 groups. Prevalence of metal transfer to the inner taper of the femoral head (8% vs 10%) and the median metal transfer scores (1.2±0.9 vs 1.4±1.1 points) were not significantly different (P=.213 vs .729, respectively) between the 2 groups. [Orthopedics. 2019; 42(1):e99-e103.].

No Increase in Survival for 36-mm versus 32-mm Femoral Heads in Metal-on-polyethylene THA: A Registry Study

BACKGROUND

During the past decade, the 32-mm head has replaced the 28-mm head as the most common head size used in primary THA in many national registries, and the use of 36-mm heads has also increased. However, it is unclear whether 32-mm and 36-mm heads decrease the revision risk in metal-on-polyethylene (MoP) THA compared with 28-mm heads.

QUESTIONS/PURPOSES

(1) In the setting of the Nordic Arthroplasty Register Association database, does the revision risk for any reason differ among 28-, 32-, and 36-mm head sizes in patients undergoing surgery with MoP THA? (2) Does the revision risk resulting from dislocation decrease with increasing head diameter (28-36 mm) in patients undergoing surgery with MoP THA in the same registry?

METHODS

Data were derived from the Nordic Arthroplasty Register Association database, a collaboration among the national arthroplasty registries of Denmark, Finland, Norway, and Sweden. Patients with primary osteoarthritis who had undergone primary THA with a 28-, 32-, or 36-mm MoP bearing from 2003 to 2014 were included. Patients operated on with dual-mobility cups were excluded. In patients with bilateral THA, only the first operated hip was included. After applying the inclusion criteria, the number of patients and THAs with a complete data set was determined to be 186,231, which accounted for 51% of all hips (366,309) with primary osteoarthritis operated on with THA of any head size and bearing type during the study observation time. Of the included patients, 60% (111,046 of 186,231) were women, the mean age at surgery was 70 (± 10) years, and the median followup was 4.5 years (range, 0-14 years). A total of 101,094 patients had received a 28-mm, 57,853 a 32-mm, and 27,284 a 36-mm head with 32 mm used as the reference group. The revision of any component for any reason was the primary outcome and revision for dislocation was the secondary outcome. Very few patients are estimated to be lost to followup because emigration in the population of interest (older than 65-70 years) is rare. A Kaplan-Meier analysis was used to estimate THA survival for each group, whereas Cox regression models were fitted to calculate hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for THA revision comparing the 28- and 36-mm head diameters with the 32-mm head diameters adjusting for age, sex, year of surgery, type of cup and stem fixation, polyethylene type (crosslinked versus conventional), and surgical approach.

RESULTS

In the adjusted Cox regression model, there was no difference in the adjusted risk for revision for any reason between patients with 28-mm (HR, 1.06; 95% CI, 0.97-0.16) and 32-mm heads, whereas the risk of revision was higher for patients with 36-mm heads (HR, 1.14; 95% CI, 1.04-1.26) compared with patients with 32-mm heads. Patients with 28-mm heads had a higher risk of revision for dislocation (HR, 1.67; 95% CI, 1.38-1.98) compared with 32 mm, whereas there was no difference between patients with 36-mm (HR, 0.85; 95% CI, 0.70-1.02) and 32-mm heads.

CONCLUSIONS

After adjusting for relevant confounding variables, we found no benefits for 32-mm heads against 28 mm in terms of overall revision risk. However, when dislocation risk is considered, 32-mm heads would be a better option, because they had a lower risk of revision resulting from dislocation. There were no benefits with the use of 36-mm heads over 32 mm, because the transition from 32 to 36 mm was associated with a higher risk of revision for all reasons, which was not accompanied by a decrease in the risk of revision resulting from dislocation. The use of 32-mm heads appears to offer the best compromise between joint stability and other reasons for revision in MoP THA. Further studies with longer followup, especially of 36-mm heads, as well as better balance of confounders across head sizes and better control of patient-related risk factors for THA revision are needed.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III, therapeutic study.

Bearing surfaces in primary total hip arthroplasty

Total hip arthroplasty (THA) is widely considered one of the most successful surgical procedures in orthopaedics. It is associated with high satisfaction rates and significant improvements in quality of life following surgery. On the other hand, the main cause of late revision is osteolysis and wear, often a result of failure of bearing surfaces.Currently, several options are available to the surgeon when choosing the bearing surface in THA (ceramic-on-ceramic (CoC), ceramic-on-polyethylene (CoPE), metal-on-polyethylene (MoPE)), each with advantages and drawbacks.Very few studies have directly compared the various combinations of bearings at long-term follow-up. Randomized controlled trials show similar short- to mid-term survivorship among the best performing bearing surfaces (CoC, CoXLPE and MoXLPE). Selection of the bearing surface is often 'experience-based' rather than 'evidence-based'.The aim of this paper is therefore to evaluate the main advantages and drawbacks of various types of tribology in THA, while providing practical suggestions for the surgeon on the most suitable bearing surface option for each patient. Cite this article: EFORT Open Rev 2018;3 DOI: 10.1302/2058-5241.3.180300.

Head size in primary total hip arthroplasty

The use of larger femoral head size in total hip arthroplasty (THA) has increased during the past decade; 32 mm and 36 mm are the most commonly used femoral head sizes, as reported by several arthroplasty registries.The use of large femoral heads seems to be a trade-off between increased stability and decreased THA survivorship.We reviewed the literature, mainly focussing on the past 5 years, identifying benefits and complications associated with the trend of using larger femoral heads in THA.We found that there is no benefit in hip range of movement or hip function when head sizes > 36 mm are used.The risk of revision due to dislocation is lower for 36 mm or larger bearings compared with 28 mm or smaller and probably even with 32 mm.Volumetric wear and frictional torque are increased in bearings bigger than 32 mm compared with 32 mm or smaller in metal-on-cross-linked polyethylene (MoXLPE) THA, but not in ceramic-on-XLPE (CoXLPE).Long-term THA survivorship is improved for 32 mm MoXLPE bearings compared with both larger and smaller ones.We recommend a 32 mm femoral head if MoXLPE bearings are used. In hips operated on with larger bearings the use of ceramic heads on XLPE appears to be safer. Cite this article: EFORT Open Rev 2018;3 DOI: 10.1302/2058-5241.3.170061.

Application of a Causal Discovery Algorithm to the Analysis of Arthroplasty Registry Data

Improving the quality of care for hip arthroplasty (replacement) patients requires the systematic evaluation of clinical performance of implants and the identification of "outlier" devices that have an especially high risk of reoperation ("revision"). Postmarket surveillance of arthroplasty implants, which rests on the analysis of large patient registries, has been effective in identifying outlier implants such as the ASR metal-on-metal hip resurfacing device that was recalled. Although identifying an implant as an outlier implies a causal relationship between the implant and revision risk, traditional signal detection methods use classical biostatistical methods. The field of probabilistic graphical modeling of causal relationships has developed tools for rigorous analysis of causal relationships in observational data. The purpose of this study was to evaluate one causal discovery algorithm (PC) to determine its suitability for hip arthroplasty implant signal detection. Simulated data were generated using distributions of patient and implant characteristics, and causal discovery was performed using the TETRAD software package. Two sizes of registries were simulated: (1) a statewide registry in Michigan and (2) a nationwide registry in the United Kingdom. The results showed that the algorithm performed better for the simulation of a large national registry. The conclusion is that the causal discovery algorithm used in this study may be a useful tool for implant signal detection for large arthroplasty registries; regional registries may only be able to only detect implants that perform especially poorly.

Surgical research using national databases

Recent changes in healthcare and advances in technology have increased the use of large-volume national databases in surgical research. These databases have been used to develop perioperative risk stratification tools, assess postoperative complications, calculate costs, and investigate numerous other topics across multiple surgical specialties. The results of these studies contain variable information but are subject to unique limitations. The use of large-volume national databases is increasing in popularity, and thorough understanding of these databases will allow for a more sophisticated and better educated interpretation of studies that utilize such databases. This review will highlight the composition, strengths, and weaknesses of commonly used national databases in surgical research.