Survivorship of polyethylene liner exchanges performed for the treatment of wear and osteolysis among porous-coated cups

Acetabular component liner exchange with highly crosslinked polyethylene for wear and osteolysis

Aims

Isolated acetabular liner exchange with a highly crosslinked polyethylene (HXLPE) component is an option to address polyethylene wear and osteolysis following total hip arthroplasty (THA) in the presence of a well-fixed acetabular shell. The liner can be fixed either with the original locking mechanism or by being cemented within the acetabular component. Whether the method used for fixation of the HXLPE liner has any bearing on the long-term outcomes is still unclear.

Methods

Data were retrieved for all patients who underwent isolated acetabular component liner exchange surgery with a HXLPE component in our institute between August 2000 and January 2015. Patients were classified according to the fixation method used (original locking mechanism (n = 36) or cemented (n = 50)). Survival and revision rates were compared. A total of 86 revisions were performed and the mean duration of follow-up was 13 years.

Results

A total of 20 patients (23.3%) had complications, with dislocation alone being the most common (8.1%; 7/86). Ten patients (11.6%) required re-revision surgery. Cementing the HXLPE liner (8.0%; 4/50) had a higher incidence of re-revision due to acetabular component liner-related complications than using the original locking mechanism (0%; 0/36; p = 0.082). Fixation using the original locking mechanism was associated with re-revision due to acetabular component loosening (8.3%; 3/36), compared to cementing (0%; 0/50; p = 0.038). Overall estimated mean survival was 19.2 years. There was no significant difference in the re-revision rate between the original locking mechanism (11.1%; 4/36) and cementing (12.0%; 6/50; p = 0.899). Using Kaplan-Meier survival analysis, the revision-free survival of HXLPE fixed with the original locking mechanism and cementing was 94.1% and 93.2%, respectively, at ten years, and 84.7% and 81.3%, respectively, at 20 years (p = 0.840).

Conclusion

The re-revision rate and the revision-free survival following acetabular component liner exchange revision surgery using the HXLPE liner were not influenced by the fixation technique used. Both techniques were associated with good survival at a mean follow-up of 13 years. Careful patient selection is necessary for isolated acetabular component liner exchange revision surgery in order to achieve the best outcomes.

Is Retention of the Acetabular Component at Revision Surgery a Long-Term Solution?

Background

Acetabular retention in revision total hip arthroplasty (THA) may be advantageous, yet long-term survival data is limited. Thus, we investigated long-term survivorship of retained acetabular components in revision THA with analysis of rerevision rate, instability risk, and clinical outcomes.

Methods

We reviewed 98 hips with polyethylene wear and/or osteolysis that were revised with retained acetabular components. Acetabular inclination and anteversion were measured from prerevision radiographs. A retrospective chart review was performed, collecting outcomes of interest including Harris hip score, instability events, and rerevision surgery. Kaplan-Meier analysis was used to calculate the risk of revision over time. Predictors of survival including acetabular component position were analyzed by multiple logistic regression.

Results

Average follow-up was 13 years (range, 5-24). Survivorship rates at 5, 10, 15, and 20 years were 89.7%, 81.6%, 70.8%, and 63.8%, respectively. There was improvement in average Harris hip score (61 to 76, P < .0001). There was a 9% rate of dislocation, and 6 hips (6%) were rerevised for recurrent instability. Overall, there were 23 (23%) rerevisions at an average of 6.1 years with the most common reasons being instability (6%) and aseptic loosening (6%). Use of conventional polyethylene was the only identified independent predictor of rerevision (P = .025).

Conclusions

Retention of a well-fixed acetabular component in revision THA provides acceptable long-term outcomes with a 15-year survivorship of 71%. Instability and aseptic loosening were the most common reasons for rerevision. Surgeons may consider retaining the acetabular component at revision surgery if the implant is well-fixed and well-positioned.

Isolated Liner Exchange in Total Hip Arthroplasty at a Mean of 13 Years of Follow-up: Does Fixation Technique Matter?

BACKGROUND

Isolated liner exchange is an option to address polyethylene wear after total hip arthroplasty (THA). The liner can be fixed with either the original locking mechanism or cemented into the acetabular cup. Whether the method used for liner fixation has any bearing on the outcomes in the first and second decade after surgery is still unclear.

METHODS

Data for all patients who had undergone isolated liner exchange surgery in our institution between April 1995 and January 2015 were retrieved. Patients were classified according to the type of polyethylene liner (conventional or highly crosslinked polyethylene) and the locking mechanism used (original locking mechanism or cemented). Survivorship and revision rates were compared among different subgroups. A total of 118 isolated liner exchanges were performed and patients had a mean duration of follow-up of 13 years (range, 5 to 25).

RESULTS

Overall estimated mean survivorship was 17 years. Use of highly crosslinked polyethylene (HXLPE) had a lower re-revision rate compared to conventional liners (10.5 versus 46.9%) (P < .001). The re-revision rate of exchanges using HXLPE was not affected by the type of fixation (original locking mechanism 11.1 versus cement 10.0%, P = .868). Conversely, using the original locking mechanism with a conventional liner had a higher re-revision rate compared to cemented conventional liners (58.3 versus 12.5%) (P = .024).

CONCLUSION

HXLPE liners should be used in insert exchange surgery whenever possible. Re-revision rate of exchanges using HXLPE was not affected by the fixation technique used. Cementing an insert into an acetabular component is associated with good survivorship at a mean of 13 years follow-up.

Long-Term Survivorship of Cemented and Uncemented Polyethylene Liner Exchange

BACKGROUND

Revision surgery is usually required for complications associated with total hip arthroplasty (THA). Significant morbidity can be associated with revision THA and thus some may only revise the liner of the original metal back component if it is found to be well fixed. We compare the long-term survivorship of cemented and uncemented head-liner THA exchange surgeries and possible causes.

METHODS

Between 2000 and 2018, we reviewed cases from our arthroplasty database who underwent THA revision for head-liner exchange. We stratified our cohort into 2 groups: cemented and uncemented liners. Patients were followed clinically and radiographically to determine survivorship of the exchanges for both cemented and uncemented liners. Implant survivorship was measured using a competing risk analysis considering death and patients lost to follow-up as competing risks.

RESULTS

A total of 84 patients (85 hips) underwent head-liner exchange surgery during the study period (21 cemented and 64 uncemented liners). The mean follow-up time was 6.9 years, with 75.3% and 24.7% of patients having been revised due to non-dislocation and dislocation causes, respectively. Two cemented liners (9.5%) and 11 uncemented liners (17.2%) required revision. The survival analysis of all head-liner revision was 86.4% at 18 years. Survival estimates liner exchanges due to dislocation versus non-dislocation groups were 57.3% versus 82.7% respectively (P = .034).

CONCLUSION

The present study shows improved survivorship of head-liner exchanges performed due to non-dislocation etiology compared to dislocation etiology, but no difference in survivorship between cemented and uncemented head-liner exchange.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III.

Does Approach Influence the Dislocation Rate Following Head and Liner Exchange in Revision Hip Arthroplasty?

BACKGROUND

Revision total hip arthroplasty with modular component exchange can limit morbidity by retaining well-fixed components but dislocation has been a relatively frequent postoperative complication. This study evaluated the effect of surgical approach on dislocation rate in a modern revision cohort.

METHODS

From 2010 to 2020, 248 aseptic head and liner exchanges were performed at a single institution. The mean patient age at revision was 64.9 ± 10.4 years and 50% (123/248) were performed among males. Indications for revision included 140 (56%) for polyethylene wear, 68 (27%) for failed metal-on-metal components, and 40 (16%) for instability. The mean follow-up after revision was 2.3 years.

RESULTS

Thirty (12%) hips dislocated at a mean of 0.6 years (range 0.01-4.6) postoperatively. The dislocation rate by revision approach was 17% (9/54) for the direct anterior, 6% (5/80) for the direct lateral, and 14% (16/114) for the posterolateral approach (P = .13). Hips revised by the direct anterior approach that dislocated were more abducted (51 ± 8 vs 45 ± 8, P = .05) and more anteverted (26 ± 9 vs 20 ± 7, P = .04) than non-dislocators. Among all 248 hips, cups with more than 48° of abduction were 2.6 times more likely to dislocate (P = .01). Head diameter, neck length, patient age, and gender were not associated with dislocation (P ≥ .20).

CONCLUSION

Dislocation remains a common complication after head and liner exchange regardless of approach. Cup position is associated with postoperative instability and must be critically evaluated during preoperative planning.

Revision of Arpe® trapeziometacarpal prosthesis by isolated head and linear exchange in five patients

With the increase in the number of trapeziometacarpal arthroplasties being done, the indications for revision due to implant wear will also increase significantly in the coming years. Isolated linear exchange in the context of polyethylene wear without osteolysis or loosening of the implants is already well known in the case of hip arthroplasty. This revision option offers the advantages of less morbidity, faster recovery, and bone preservation. We retrospectively reviewed five patients who underwent trapeziometacarpal revision with isolated polyethylene liner exchange. Revision surgery was performed an average of 17.6 years (10.7-21.3 years) after the primary arthroplasty procedure. The indication for revision was dislocation in four cases and prophylactic revision for wear and limited osteolysis of the cavity in the other case. Mean follow-up was 48.7 months (36-60). One patient had a recurrent dislocation 4 years after revision and required another revision where only the cup was changed. The other patients had no instability, and no complications were reported. The mean QuickDASH score was 11.9 (4.5-15.9). Pinch strength was 102% (90-120) and grip strength was 92% (70-110) relative to the opposite side. Radiological evaluation showed no abnormalities at the last follow-up. Trapeziectomy is often the solution of choice in the surgical revision of arthroplasties. Unipolar revision of the cup has the risk of trapezium fracture, especially when the cup is well integrated. The technique we report here preserves bone and simplifies the surgical procedure with outcomes corresponding to those of primary arthroplasty. Isolated exchange of the polyethylene liner is a relevant option in the revision of trapeziometacarpal arthroplasty with good short-term results.

Isolated Acetabular Liner Exchange for Polyethylene Wear and Osteolysis with Well-Fixed Metal Shell

Background

The isolated liner and head exchange procedure has been an established treatment method for polyethylene wear and osteolysis when the acetabular component remains well fixed. In this study, the mid-term results of this procedure were evaluated retrospectively.

Methods

Among the consecutive patients operated on from September 1995, two patients (three hips) were excluded because of inadequate follow-up, and the results of remaining 34 patients (34 hips) were evaluated. There were 20 men and 14 women with a mean age of 49 years. A conventional polyethylene liner was used in 26 cases and a highly cross-linked polyethylene liner was used in eight cases. In three cases, the liner was cemented in a metal shell because a compatible liner could not be used.

Results

After a follow-up of 5 to 20.2 years, re-revision surgery was necessary in 10 cases (29.4%): in eight for wear and osteolysis at 55 to 101 months after liner exchange and in two for acetabular loosening at 1 and 1.5 years after liner exchange. Re-revision surgery included all component revision (four cases), cup revision (four cases), and liner exchange (two cases). In all re-revision cases, a conventional polyethylene liner was used initially. There was no failure in the cases in which a highly cross-linked polyethylene liner was used.

Conclusions

The results of this study suggest that isolated acetabular liner exchange is a reasonable option for wear and osteolysis when the metal shell is well fixed. More promising long-term results are expected with the use of highly cross-linked polyethylene liners.

Evaluation and Treatment of Patients With Acetabular Osteolysis After Total Hip Arthroplasty

As the demand for total hip arthroplasty (THA) continues to increase, the burden of revision THA is also expected to increase. Although the quality of polyethylene has improved markedly, osteolysis continues to be a risk for older designs and younger, active patients. Although progressive but typically asymptomatic in early stages, osteolysis can result in component failure and complicate revision surgery. Serial radiographs are paramount for monitoring progression. Although select cases may be treated with observation, surgery should be considered based on age, activity level, and projected life span. Well-fixed, noncemented modular acetabular components may be treated with curettage and bone grafting, as well as having to bear liner exchange with retention of the acetabular shell. However, in the setting of osteolysis, it is controversial whether bone grafting and component retention is superior to cup revision. This review explores the pathophysiology of osteolysis after THA and provides a comprehensive analysis of the evaluation and treatment of patients with osteolysis.

The incidence of dissociated liners in 4,751 consecutive total hip arthroplasties using Pinnacle polyethylene acetabular liners

INTRODUCTION

Acetabular liner dissociation is a complication exclusive to modular designs. We present a single surgeon series of 8 polyethylene liner dissociations with the Pinnacle Acetabular System (DePuy Orthopaedics) from over 4,750 cases. We also present a review of the literature and data from the UK National Joint Registry (NJR) on dissociation in total hip arthroplasty (THA).

METHODS

The Pinnacle Acetabular System has been used exclusively by the senior author since April 2003, and to date 5,882 have been implanted (837 ceramic liners, 4,751 polyethylene liners (1,606 Enduron/3,145 Marathon) and 294 metal liners). We reviewed all cases of liner dissociation from this cohort to determine an overall incidence with polyethylene liners, identify associated risk factors, and report the outcome following revision surgery.

RESULTS

Our incidence of this complication is 8 out of 4,751 cases (0.17%). Review of these cases and the literature suggests that femoral neck impingement against the polyethylene liner and/or edge loading may produce fatigue failure of the locking mechanism and subsequent dissociation.

CONCLUSIONS

Ensuring correct liner seating/locking, minimising impingement, achieving appropriate component version and avoiding radiographic cup inclinations >50° should minimise the risk of liner dissociation. Any new noise or squeaking from a polyethylene liner should undergo radiographic investigation to exclude dissociation. We recommend managing late cases of liner dissociation with revision of the acetabular shell if the cup orientation could be improved or if there is any damage to the liner-locking groove, to reduce the risk of recurrence.

Survivorship of Total Hip Joint Replacements Following Isolated Liner Exchange for Wear

BACKGROUND

Liner exchange for articular component wear in total hip joint replacements (THJRs) is a common procedure, often thought to be benign with reliable outcomes. Recent studies, however, suggest high failure rates of liner exchange revisions with significant complications. The primary aim of this study was, therefore, to analyze the survivorship of isolated liner exchange for articular component wear, and secondarily to assess the influence of patient demographics (gender, age, and American Society of Anaesthesiologists [ASA] ratings) on rerevisions following isolated liner exchange for wear.

METHODS

A retrospective review of the 15-year New Zealand Joint Registry (1999-2014) was performed, analyzing the outcomes of isolated liner exchange for articular component wear. The survivorship as defined as rerevision with component exchange was determined and 10-year Kaplan-Meier survivorship curves were constructed. These revision rates were compared to age, gender, and ASA rating groups using a log-rank test.

RESULTS

The 10-year survivorship of THJR following liner exchange revision for liner wear was 75.3%. If a rerevision was required, the median time to rerevision was 1.33 years with a rerevision rate of 3.33 per 100 component years (95% confidence interval 2.68-4.08/100 component years). The principle reasons for rerevision were dislocation (48.4%) and acetabular component loosening (20.9%). There was no statistically significant difference in rerevision rates based on gender, age categories, or ASA scores.

CONCLUSION

THJR isolated liner exchange for liner wear is not a benign procedure with a survivorship of 75.3% at 10 years. Surgeons contemplating liner exchange revisions should be cognisant of this risk and should adequately assess component position and stability preoperatively.

Isolated Head and Liner Exchange in Revision Hip Arthroplasty

As the number of primary total hip arthroplasties increases, so does the burden of revision procedures. The decision to revise well-fixed components in the setting of polyethylene wear and osteolysis is controversial. Modular head and liner exchange offers the advantages of reduced invasiveness, faster recovery, and bone preservation. These advantages come at the expense of higher rates of revision surgery for instability. Using the native locking mechanism for securing the new liner is preferred; however, cementing a liner into a well-fixed acetabular component is a practical alternative. The use of bone allograft or bone graft substitute for areas of osteolysis is controversial. In the setting of osteolysis, outcomes associated with the use of highly cross-linked polyethylene liners have been better than those associated with the use of conventional polyethylene; therefore, thinner liners and larger femoral heads can be used and reduce the risk of instability.

Complete Wear-Through of a Polyethylene Liner and Metal-Backed Acetabular Cup Resulting in a Unique Form of Catastrophic Total Hip Arthroplasty Failure: A Case Report

CASE

We describe a case of total hip arthroplasty failure where a cobalt-chrome femoral head completely wore through the polyethylene liner and the titanium acetabular cup. The patient subsequently underwent revision total hip arthroplasty with acetabular revision and femoral head exchange.

CONCLUSION

This case illustrates the natural history of catastrophic failure in a metal-on-polyethylene total hip arthroplasty design. If recognized earlier, this patient may have been a candidate for isolated liner and head exchange. Additionally, this case represents a unique complication in using mixed metals in total hip arthroplasty, where the harder cobalt-chrome femoral head wore completely through the much softer titanium component.

What are the current clinical issues in wear and tribocorrosion?

Wear and corrosion in joint arthroplasty are important causes of failure. From the standpoint of current clinical importance, there are four main categories of wear and tribocorrosion: polyethylene wear, ceramic-on-ceramic (CoC) bearing wear, metal-on-metal (MoM) bearing wear, and taper tribocorrosion. Recently, problems with wear in the knee have become less prominent as have many issues with hip polyethylene (PE) bearings resulting from the success of crosslinked PE. However, MoM articulations and taper tribocorrosion have been associated with soft tissue inflammatory responses, and as a result, they have become prominent clinical concerns. WHERE ARE WE NOW?: For PE wear in the hip, several advances include improved locking mechanisms and data supporting highly crosslinked polyethylenes (HXLPE). Edge-loading in CoC articulations can contribute to stripe wear and subsequent squeaking. For MoM articulations, the relationship of wear-to-edge loading, sensitivity to component positioning, typical soft tissue response, and use of imaging is increasingly understood. Taper tribocorrosion (from femoral head-neck junctions and other modular elements) and associated soft tissue inflammatory responses appear to be serious clinical issues that are not fully understood. WHERE DO WE NEED TO GO?: In the knee, clinical concerns remain with the efficacy of HXLPE, modular connections, and metal allergies. For PE wear in the hip, concerns remain regarding how to increase crosslinking of PE while minimizing PE fractures. With CoC articulations, questions remain on how to prevent noises, chipping, and impingement and if enhanced designs can contribute to improved results. For MoM articulations, we need to improve imaging tests for soft tissue reactions, determine best practices in terms of monitoring protocols, and better define if, how, and when to act on serum metal levels. For taper tribocorrosion, we need to use modularity wisely and also understand how to improve tapers and materials in the future. For patients at risk for tribocorrosion, we need to define realistic diagnostic and monitoring protocols. We also need to enhance revision methods, and the threshold of acceptable soft tissue damage, to minimize complications associated with soft tissue damage such as hip instability. HOW DO WE GET THERE?: HXLPE and other bearing surfaces will likely continue to be refined. We need to develop tapers with more resistance to tribocorrosion through improved understanding of the manufacturing process and ongoing engineering improvements. Revision procedures for wear and tribocorrosion can be enhanced by determining when partial component retention is appropriate and how best to manage soft tissue damage. For CoC articulations, enhanced designs are required to minimize noises, chipping, and impingement. Importantly, we must continue to promote and analyze joint replacement registries to identify early failures and analyze long-term successes.

The surgical options and clinical evidence for treatment of wear or corrosion occurring with THA or TKA

BACKGROUND

Wear and corrosion occurring in patients with hip and knee arthroplasty are common causes of failure leading to revision surgery. A variety of surgical approaches to these problems have been described, with varying efficacy. Polyethylene wear, metal-on-metal (MoM) hip bearing wear, and problems associated with modular taper corrosion are the areas of greatest clinical impact; results of revisions for these problems are likely to dictate a large portion of revision resources for the foreseeable future, and so they call for specific study.

QUESTIONS/PURPOSES

We identified the most frequently reported procedures to treat hip polyethylene wear, knee polyethylene wear, MoM wear after THA, and modular taper corrosion and determined the timing and reasons these failed.

METHODS

We performed systematic reviews of the published literature on the four topics using MEDLINE(®) and Embase in October 2013; searches were supplemented by hand searches of bibliographies. Prespecified criteria resulted in the identification of 38 relevant articles, of which 33 were either case reports or Level IV evidence. Followup was generally at short term and ranged from 0.2 to 8 years.

RESULTS

The most frequently reported procedures for treating clinically important wear were a partial or complete revision. When treating polyethylene wear, the more frequently reported reasons for hip and knee rerevisions were loosening, continued wear, and instability. Soft tissue reactions were more common and occasionally extensive in patients with MoM or modular taper corrosion. Patients with soft tissue reactions had more complications and higher rerevision rates.

CONCLUSIONS

Studies with longer followup and higher levels of evidence are needed to direct the treatment of wear and corrosion. When soft tissue damage secondary to MoM wear or taper corrosion is present, the results of treatment can be poor. There is an urgent need to better understand these two mechanisms of failure.

Revision Total Hip Arthroplasty with Retained Acetabular Component

BACKGROUND

Aseptic loosening and osteolysis commonly limit the survivorship of total hip prostheses. Retention of a well-fixed acetabular component, rather than full acetabular revision, has multiple advantages, but questions have lingered regarding the clinical success and prosthetic survivorship following this procedure. We examined the impact of acetabular component position, polyethylene type, liner insertion technique, femoral head size, and simultaneous revision of the entire femoral component (as opposed to head and liner exchange) or bone-grafting on mid-term to long-term prosthetic survival following such limited revisions.

METHODS

One hundred hips in 100 patients with osteolysis, polyethylene wear, or femoral component loosening underwent revision total hip arthroplasty with retention of the acetabular component. Acetabular component inclination and anteversion were measured on prerevision radiographs and were categorized according to predetermined positional safe zones (inclination of 35° to 55° and anteversion of 5° to 25°). Operative reports were reviewed for femoral head size, polyethylene liner type (conventional or highly cross-linked), liner insertion technique (use of the existing locking mechanism or cementation), whether the patient had revision of the entire femoral component, and use of bone graft. Outcomes of interest included the Harris hip score, University of California at Los Angeles (UCLA) activity score, episodes of instability, and need for repeat revision.

RESULTS

At an average of 6.6 years (range, two to fourteen years) postoperatively, the Harris hip and UCLA activity scores were both significantly improved compared with the preoperative scores (p < 0.0001 and p < 0.01, respectively). Overall, the failure rate was 13%. In addition, 6% of the patients had postoperative instability. Hips in which the acetabular component was outside of the safe zone for inclination had a higher rate of failure (p = 0.048). Use of conventional, rather than highly cross-linked, polyethylene at the time of revision was also associated with an increased rate of repeat revision (p = 0.025).

CONCLUSIONS

Revision total hip arthroplasty with retention of the acetabular component is associated with good outcomes in hips with an appropriately positioned, well-fixed acetabular component. Acetabular components outside the safe zone for inclination were at a higher risk for failure, as was use of conventional polyethylene.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic Level IV. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.