Ceramic-on-ceramic bearing surface and risk of revision due to dislocation after primary total hip replacement

Predictors of Reoperation and Survival Experience (Minimum 1 Year) for Primary Versus Conversion Total Hip Arthroplasty in Young Patients

BACKGROUND

Total hip arthroplasty (THA), including primary and conversion procedures, is commonly used for many types of joint disease in patients aged below 65 years, though few studies have evaluated THA outcomes in young patients (≤ 40 years old). This study examined a large cohort of patients who underwent THA at a young (≤ 40 years old) age to identify predictors of reoperation and compare survivorship between primary and conversion THAs.

METHODS

A retrospective study was conducted on 497 patients who underwent 612 primary and conversion THAs at 40 years old or younger between 1990 and 2020. Medical records were reviewed to collect patient/surgical data. A multivariable logistic regression model identified independent predictors of reoperation, and Kaplan-Meier analysis with log-rank tests was used to compare survival curves by THA type.

RESULTS

The median age at surgery (interquartile range) was 31 years (25 to 36). The median follow-up time was 6.6 years (range, 3.8 to 10.5). Conversion THAs had an increased rate of both revisions (12.3 versus 5.6%, P = 0.02) and nonrevision reoperations (8.9 versus 3.2%, P = 0.03) compared to primary THAs. A ceramic-on-ceramic articulation (odds ratio: 5.17; P = 0.03) and a higher estimated blood loss (odds ratio: 1.0007; P = 0.03) were independent predictors of reoperation for primary and conversion THA, respectively. Conversion THAs had a lower 15-year survival (77.8 versus 90.8%, P = 0.009) compared to primary THAs.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients ≤ 40 years old who underwent primary and conversion THAs demonstrated an impressive 15-year survival comparable to that of older populations (74 to 93%), while conversion procedures had a higher reoperation rate. Although primary THA may be more ideal, there are promising outcomes for patients who need THA at a younger age than typically implemented, especially for those who are very young (≤ 30 years old).

Head, acetabular liner composition, and rate of revision and wear in total hip arthroplasty: a Bayesian network meta-analysis

Total hip arthroplasty (THA) is a common procedure for patients suffering from hip pain e.g. from osteoarthritis, osteonecrosis, or hip fractures. The satisfaction of patients undergoing THA is influenced by the choice of implant type and material, with one key factor being the selection of the appropriate material combination for the bearing surface. In this Bayesian network meta-analysis, we investigated the impact of material combinations for the bearing surface on the longevity of hip implants. The wear penetration rate per year and the total wear penetration in the liner resulting from different material combinations, as well as the survival rate at last follow-up, were examined. We analyzed a total of 663,038 THAs, with 55% of patients being women. Mean patient age was 59.0 ± 8.1 years and mean BMI 27.6 ± 2.6 kg/m2. The combination of an aluminium oxide (Al2O3) head and an Al2O3 liner demonstrated the lowest wear penetration at last follow-up and the lowest rate of wear penetration per year. Additionally, the combination of a crosslinked polyethylene (XLPE) liner and a zircon oxide (ZrO2) head demonstrated the lowest rate of revision at last follow-up. These findings underscore the importance of careful material selection for hip implant bearing surfaces to optimize their longevity and patient satisfaction after THA.

The influence of bearing surfaces on revisions due to dislocations in total hip arthroplasty

INTRODUCTION

Recurrent dislocations are still the most frequent reason for revision in total hip arthroplasty (THA). The impact of bearing surfaces on dislocations is still controversial. We hypothesized that: (1) bearing surfaces influence the revisions due to dislocations; (2) ceramic-on-ceramic reduced the revisions for dislocations in adjusted models; (3) Delta-on-Delta bearings reduced the revisions for dislocations in comparison to surfaces with cross-linked polyethylene.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The regional arthroplasty registry was enquired about bearing surfaces and revisions for dislocations and instability. Unadjusted and adjusted rates were provided, including sex, age (<65 years or ≥65 years), head diameter (≤28 mm or >28 mm; <36 mm or ≥36 mm) as variables. 44,065 THAs were included.

RESULTS

The rate of revisions for dislocations was significantly lower in ceramic-on-ceramic and metal-on-metal bearings (unadjusted rates). After adjusting for age, sex, and head size (36 and 28 mm), hard-on-hard bearings were protective (p < 0.05): ceramic-on-ceramic had a lower risk of revisions due to dislocation than ceramic-on-polyethylene (HR 1.6, 95% CI 1.2-2.2 p = 0.0009). The rate of revisions for dislocation was similar in bearings with cross-linked polyethylene and Delta-on-Delta articulations, in unadjusted and adjusted models.

CONCLUSION

Bearings with conventional polyethylene were more predisposed to dislocations. Currently adopted bearings exerted no significant influence on revisions due to dislocations. These findings could be primarily related to wear, but due to the time distribution, soft tissue envelopes and surface tension may also play a role. Pre-clinical biomechanical evaluations and prospective matched cohort studies are required to draw definitive conclusions.

Delta-on-Delta Ceramic Bearing Surfaces in Revision Hip Arthroplasty

BACKGROUND

Fourth-generation ceramic-on-ceramic couplings were developed to improve ceramic toughness and strength. Encouraging outcomes in primary total hip arthroplasty were reported. This coupling was proposed as an attractive option even in the case of revision procedures, particularly in younger patients with a longer life expectancy. However, the pertinent literature is scarce. Thus, a registry study was conducted to investigate the midterm survival rates and reasons for re-revision of the fourth-generation ceramic-on-ceramic bearing surfaces in revision hip arthroplasties.

METHODS

A total of 327 revision implants (all the components were exchanged) with BIOLOX Delta couplings were investigated using the regional orthopedic registry RIPO. The demographics, the survival rates, and the reasons for re-revision were assessed. Revisions with bearings other than Delta were compared.

RESULTS

Delta bearings achieved a survival rate of 90.5% at 7 years, with stable results. Twenty-six (8%) re-revisions occurred at a mean follow-up of 4.1 years. And 2.8% of the re-revisions were due to recurrent dislocations; 1.5% of the cases were due to cup aseptic loosening. Septic loosening occurred in 1.6% of the cases. No ceramic fractures were reported. When compared to revisions with bearings other than Delta-on-Delta, Delta coupling cohort achieved similar performances at 5 and 7 years. Lower, nonsignificant rates of aseptic and septic loosening were reported in Delta cohort.

CONCLUSION

Delta-on-Delta couplings demonstrated to be reliable bearing surfaces in revision settings at a midterm follow-up. Clinical studies and longer follow-ups are required to investigate potential adverse effects, like squeaking and fractures, and confirm these preliminary findings.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III, therapeutic study.

The Ideal Total Hip Replacement Bearing Surface in the Young Patient: A Prospective Randomized Trial Comparing Alumina Ceramic-On-Ceramic With Ceramic-On-Conventional Polyethylene: 15-Year Follow-Up

BACKGROUND

The optimum bearing surface for total hip arthroplasty remains debatable. We have previously published our outcome at 10 years and this represents the 15-year follow-up.

METHODS

A total of 58 hips (in 57 patients with a mean age of 42 years) were randomized to receive either ceramic-on-ceramic (CoC) or ceramic-on-polyethylene (CoP) total hip arthroplasty. We prospectively followed for survivorship, functional outcomes (using the Harris Hip Score and the St Michael's Hip Score [SMH]), and radiological outcomes.

RESULTS

At a minimum of 15 years, 3 patients had died, but not been revised. Seven were lost to follow-up. Five cases from the CoP group were revised (4 for polyethylene wear and osteolysis). Four from the CoC were revised; one each for head fracture, instability, infection, and trunnionosis. Both groups showed statistically significant improvements in Harris Hip Score scores and SMH functional scores, with no difference between the 2 bearings. For the CoP group, there was an improvement from 15.6 to 21.5 in the SMH and from 48.8 to 88.7 (P > .05); and for CoC, this improvement was 15.8 to 23.5 and 50.3 to 94.6 (P > .05), respectively. Mean wear rate of the polyethylene was 0.092 mm/y and for the CoC was 0.018 mm/y. Two patients in the CoC group had evidence of acetabular osteolysis vs 3 in the CoP. Six patients had femoral osteolysis in the CoC group and 12 in the CoP group.

CONCLUSION

Survivorship and function of the 2 bearing groups remains comparable; while the polyethylene wear and osteolysis may represent issues in the future.

Long-term follow-up of 1217 consecutive short-stem total hip arthroplasty (THA): a retrospective single-center experience

BACKGROUND

An arthroplasty registry in Germany has been recently established but long-term results for most short-stem innovations are missing. Short-stem hip arthroplasty is usually indicated in young active patients. Our indication was extended to older age groups, femoral neck fractures (FNF), and dysplasia. We evaluated all total hip arthroplasties (THAs) in this population with a collum femoris preserving stem (CFP) performed from 2003 to 2013.

METHODS

A consecutive cohort of 1217 CFP THAs with a mean age of 68.7 years was followed retrospectively for a median of 4.8 years (patient follow-up interquartile range from 3.0 to 6.9 years). A questionnaire, which we used in two previous studies, was answered by 89.15% of patients and included information regarding complaints, grade of satisfaction, re-operations, and dislocation. Of the 1217 patients, 77 had died. Survival of the stem and the cup was assessed using a competing risks approach according to an Aalen-Johanson estimator with revision for septic or aseptic loosening or death as a competing endpoint.

RESULTS

Of the patients who answered the questionnaire, 92.5% had no complaints related to the procedures. In all 1217 patients, there were 43 revisions (4.2%) as follows: stem and cup revisions due to aseptic loosening of the stem (n = 10), infections (n = 6), pain (n = 4), or trauma (n = 3); cup revisions due to aseptic loosening (n = 3), dislocation (n = 5), and offset revisions (n = 12). Survivorship was 96% for the stem and 99% for the cup 9 years postoperatively. Statistical analysis confirmed a higher risk for revision in patients with a younger age (p = 0.033), male sex (p = 0.040), dysplasia (p = 0.032), and undersized or extra-large stems for stem revisions (p = 0.001) and female sex (p = 0.036) for cup revisions. FNF (p > 0.20) and age ≥ 80 years (p = 0.114) had no higher risk for loosening of the stem. Our data is also compared with the current literature, especially with the available CFP studies.

CONCLUSION

The survival rate of the CFP stem was as high as 96% after 9 years of followup which compares well-to-previously published long-term survival rates. There is no higher risk for revision in patients 80 years old or older and in cases with femoral neck fractures. The CFP preserves also allowed using standard stems in the rare cases of revision.

Are ceramic-on-ceramic bearings in total hip arthroplasty associated with reduced revision risk for late dislocation?

BACKGROUND

Dislocation is a major complication after primary total hip arthroplasty (THA), but little is known about the potential relationships between bearing materials and risk of dislocation. Dislocation within the first year after surgery is typically related to either surgical error or patient inattention to precautions, but the reasons for dislocation after the first year are often unclear, and whether ceramic bearings are associated with an increased or decreased likelihood of late dislocation is controversial.

QUESTIONS/PURPOSES

The purpose of this study was to use a national registry to assess whether the choice of bearings-metal-on-polyethylene (MoP), ceramic-on-polyethylene (CoP), ceramic-on-ceramic (CoC), or metal-on-metal (MoM)-is associated with differences in the risk of late dislocation.

METHODS

Data from primary THAs were extracted from the New Zealand Joint Registry over a 10-year period. The mean age of patients was 69 years (SD ± 12 years), and 53% were women. The median followup in this population was 7 years (range, 1-13 years). The surgical approach used was posterior in 66% of THAs, lateral in 29%, and anterior in 5%. The primary endpoint was late revision for dislocation with "late" defined as greater than 1 year postoperatively. A total of 73,386 hips were available for analysis: 65% MoP, 17% CoP, 10% CoC, and 7% MoM. In general, patients receiving CoC and MoM bearings were younger compared with patients receiving CoP and MoP bearings.

RESULTS

Four percent of the hips were revised (3130 THAs); 867 THAs were revised for dislocation. Four hundred seventy THAs were revised for dislocation after the first postoperative year. After adjusting for head size, age, and surgical approach, only CoP (hazard ratio [HR], 2.10; p = 0.021) demonstrated a higher proportion of revision, whereas MoP did not (HR, 1.76; 95% p = 0.075). There were no differences of revisions for dislocation in the CoC (HR, 1.60; p = 0.092) and MoM cohorts (HR, 1.54; p = 0.081).

CONCLUSIONS

Dislocation is a common reason for revision after THA. The relationships between bearing materials and risk of revision for late dislocation remain controversial. This large registry study demonstrated that bearing surface had little association with the incidence of late dislocation. Future studies with longer followups should continue to investigate this question.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III, therapeutic study.

Total hip replacement and surface replacement for the treatment of pain and disability resulting from end-stage arthritis of the hip (review of technology appraisal guidance 2 and 44): systematic review and economic evaluation

BACKGROUND

Total hip replacement (THR) involves the replacement of a damaged hip joint with an artificial hip prosthesis. Resurfacing arthroplasty (RS) involves replacement of the joint surface of the femoral head with a metal surface covering.

OBJECTIVES

To undertake clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness analysis of different types of THR and RS for the treatment of pain and disability in people with end-stage arthritis of the hip, in particular to compare the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of (1) different types of primary THR and RS for people in whom both procedures are suitable and (2) different types of primary THR for people who are not suitable for hip RS.

DATA SOURCES

Electronic databases including MEDLINE, EMBASE, The Cochrane Library, Current Controlled Trials and UK Clinical Research Network (UKCRN) Portfolio Database were searched in December 2012, with searches limited to publications from 2008 and sample sizes of ≥ 100 participants. Reference lists and websites of manufacturers and professional organisations were also screened.

REVIEW METHODS

Systematic reviews of the literature were undertaken to appraise the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of different types of THR and RS for people with end-stage arthritis of the hip. Included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and systematic reviews were data extracted and risk of bias and methodological quality were independently assessed by two reviewers using the Cochrane Collaboration risk of bias tool and the Assessment of Multiple Systematic Reviews (AMSTAR) tool. A Markov multistate model was developed for the economic evaluation of the technologies. Sensitivity analyses stratified by sex and controlled for age were carried out to assess the robustness of the results.

RESULTS

A total of 2469 records were screened of which 37 were included, representing 16 RCTs and eight systematic reviews. The mean post-THR Harris Hip Score measured at different follow-up times (from 6 months to 10 years) did not differ between THR groups, including between cross-linked polyethylene and traditional polyethylene cup liners (pooled mean difference 2.29, 95% confidence interval -0.88 to 5.45). Five systematic reviews reported evidence on different types of THR (cemented vs. cementless cup fixation and implant articulation materials) but these reviews were inconclusive. Eleven cost-effectiveness studies were included; four provided relevant cost and utility data for the model. Thirty registry studies were included, with no studies reporting better implant survival for RS than for all types of THR. For all analyses, mean costs for RS were higher than those for THR and mean quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) were lower. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio for RS was dominated by THR, that is, THR was cheaper and more effective than RS (for a lifetime horizon in the base-case analysis, the incremental cost of RS was £11,284 and the incremental QALYs were -0.0879). For all age and sex groups RS remained clearly dominated by THR. Cost-effectiveness acceptability curves showed that, for all patients, THR was almost 100% cost-effective at any willingness-to-pay level. There were age and sex differences in the populations with different types of THR and variations in revision rates (from 1.6% to 3.5% at 9 years). For the base-case analysis, for all age and sex groups and a lifetime horizon, mean costs for category E (cemented components with a polyethylene-on-ceramic articulation) were slightly lower and mean QALYs for category E were slightly higher than those for all other THR categories in both deterministic and probabilistic analyses. Hence, category E dominated the other four categories. Sensitivity analysis using an age- and sex-adjusted log-normal model demonstrated that, over a lifetime horizon and at a willingness-to-pay threshold of £20,000 per QALY, categories A and E were equally likely (50%) to be cost-effective.

LIMITATIONS

A large proportion of the included studies were inconclusive because of poor reporting, missing data, inconsistent results and/or great uncertainty in the treatment effect estimates. This warrants cautious interpretation of the findings. The evidence on complications was scarce, which may be because of the absence or rarity of these events or because of under-reporting. The poor reporting meant that it was not possible to explore contextual factors that might have influenced study results and also reduced the applicability of the findings to routine clinical practice in the UK. The scope of the review was limited to evidence published in English in 2008 or later, which could be interpreted as a weakness; however, systematic reviews would provide summary evidence for studies published before 2008.

CONCLUSIONS

Compared with THR, revision rates for RS were higher, mean costs for RS were higher and mean QALYs gained were lower; RS was dominated by THR. Similar results were obtained in the deterministic and probabilistic analyses and for all age and sex groups THR was almost 100% cost-effective at any willingness-to-pay level. Revision rates for all types of THR were low. Category A THR (cemented components with a polyethylene-on-metal articulation) was more cost-effective for older age groups. However, across all age-sex groups combined, the mean cost for category E THR (cemented components with a polyethylene-on-ceramic articulation) was slightly lower and the mean QALYs gained were slightly higher. Category E therefore dominated the other four categories. Certain types of THR appeared to confer some benefit, including larger femoral head sizes, use of a cemented cup, use of a cross-linked polyethylene cup liner and a ceramic-on-ceramic as opposed to a metal-on-polyethylene articulation. Further RCTs with long-term follow-up are needed.

STUDY REGISTRATION

This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42013003924.

FUNDING

The National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment programme.

Implant Optimisation for Primary Hip Replacement in Patients over 60 Years with Osteoarthritis: A Cohort Study of Clinical Outcomes and Implant Costs Using Data from England and Wales

BACKGROUND

Hip replacement is one of the most commonly performed surgical procedures worldwide; hundreds of implant configurations provide options for femoral head size, joint surface material and fixation method with dramatically varying costs. Robust comparative evidence to inform the choice of implant is needed. This retrospective cohort study uses linked national databases from England and Wales to determine the optimal type of replacement for patients over 60 years undergoing hip replacement for osteoarthritis.

METHODS AND FINDINGS

Implants included were the commonest brand from each of the four types of replacement (cemented, cementless, hybrid and resurfacing); the reference prosthesis was the cemented hip procedure. Patient reported outcome scores (PROMs), costs and risk of repeat (revision) surgery were examined. Multivariable analyses included analysis of covariance to assess improvement in PROMs (Oxford hip score, OHS, and EQ5D index) (9159 linked episodes) and competing risks modelling of implant survival (79,775 procedures). Cost of implants and ancillary equipment were obtained from National Health Service procurement data.

RESULTS

EQ5D score improvements (at 6 months) were similar for all hip replacement types. In females, revision risk was significantly higher in cementless hip prostheses (hazard ratio, HR = 2.22, p<0.001), when compared to the reference hip. Although improvement in OHS was statistically higher (22.1 versus 20.5, p<0.001) for cementless implants, this small difference is unlikely to be clinically important. In males, revision risk was significantly higher in cementless (HR = 1.95, p = 0.003) and resurfacing implants, HR = 3.46, p<0.001), with no differences in OHS. Material costs were lowest with the reference implant (cemented, range £1103 to £1524) and highest with cementless implants (£1928 to £4285). Limitations include the design of the study, which is intrinsically vulnerable to omitted variables, a paucity of long-term implant survival data (reflecting the duration of data collection), the possibility of revision under-reporting, response bias within PROMs data, and issues associated with current outcome scoring systems, which may not accurately reflect level of improvement in some patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Cement fixation, using a polyethylene cup and a standard sized head offers good outcomes, with the lowest risks and at the lowest costs. The most commonly used cementless and resurfacing implants were associated with higher risk of revision and were more costly, while perceptions of improved function and longevity were unsupported.

No functional benefit of larger femoral heads and alternative bearings at 6 months following primary hip replacement

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

There has been a recent trend towards the use of greater femoral head sizes in an attempt to improve function and enhance stability after primary hip replacement. This has been associated with the use of alternative bearings, theoretically to reduce wear and improve implant longevity.

METHODS

We examined the influence of these variables on patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) for a consecutive series of primary hip replacements using National Joint Registry (NJR) and PROMs-linked data. To minimize the confounding influence of implant design factors, the single most commonly used brand in England and Wales (DePuy Corail Pinnacle) was examined. Improvement in patient hip-specific outcomes (Oxford hip score, OHS), general health outcomes (Euroqol, EQ-5D), and rates of self-reported complications (bleeding, wound problems, re-admission, and reoperation) were compared for different head sizes (28-mm, 32-mm, and 36-mm) and bearings (metal-on-polyethylene (MoP), ceramic-on-polyethylene (CoP), and ceramic-on-ceramic (CoC)), adjusting for differences in case mix.

RESULTS

At a mean follow-up of 7 months, improvements in OHS and EQ5D index were similar for 28-mm and 36-mm heads. A 32-mm head was associated with poorer function (OHS: 20, 99% CI: 19-21, p = 0.002; EQ5D index: 0.39, 99% CI: 0.36-0.42, p = 0.004), although these small differences may not be of clinical importance. There were no statistically significant benefits of either CoP or CoC bearings compared to a MoP bearing. Complication rates were similar within comparisons of head sizes or bearings.

INTERPRETATION

In this short-term study, we did not find any functional benefits of larger head sizes or alternative bearings, after adjusting for other influences. We question their use in routine primary hip replacement given the lack of evidence of improved long-term survival in the literature.

Have cementless and resurfacing components improved the medium-term results of hip replacement for patients under 60 years of age?

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

The optimal hip replacement for young patients remains unknown. We compared patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), revision risk, and implant costs over a range of hip replacements.

METHODS

We included hip replacements for osteoarthritis in patients under 60 years of age performed between 2003 and 2010 using the commonest brand of cemented, cementless, hybrid, or resurfacing prosthesis (11,622 women and 13,087 men). The reference implant comprised a cemented stem with a conventional polyethylene cemented cup and a standard-sized head (28- or 32-mm). Differences in implant survival were assessed using competing-risks models, adjusted for known prognostic influences. Analysis of covariance was used to assess improvement in PROMs (Oxford hip score (OHS) and EQ5D index) in 2014 linked procedures.

RESULTS

In males, PROMs and implant survival were similar across all types of implants. In females, revision was statistically significantly higher in hard-bearing and/or small-stem cementless implants (hazard ratio (HR) = 4) and resurfacings (small head sizes (< 48 mm): HR = 6; large head sizes (≥ 48 mm): HR = 5) when compared to the reference cemented implant. In component combinations with equivalent survival, women reported significantly greater improvements in OHS with hybrid implants (22, p = 0.006) and cementless implants (21, p = 0.03) (reference, 18), but similar EQ5D index. For men and women, National Health Service (NHS) costs were lowest with the reference implant and highest with a hard-bearing cementless replacement.

INTERPRETATION

In young women, hybrids offer a balance of good early functional improvement and low revision risk. Fully cementless and resurfacing components are more costly and do not provide any additional benefit for younger patients.

Clinical and Radiological Outcome of the Newest Generation of Ceramic-on-Ceramic Hip Arthroplasty in Young Patients

Ceramic-on-ceramic articulations have become an attractive option for total hip arthroplasty in young patients. In this study, we retrospectively evaluated the short- to midterm clinical and radiographic results in 51 consecutive patients (61 hips) using the newest generation of ceramic implants. Results obtained in our study showed positive clinical and radiological outcomes. Both HHS and UCLA activity scores doubled after surgery and tended to increase over time. There was one infection requiring a two-stage revision and a case of squeaking that began 2 years postoperatively after a mechanical fall. The overall survival rate of the implants was 98.4% at six years with revision for any reason as the end point. Based on these results, fourth generation ceramics offer a viable option for young and active patients.

Factors influencing revision risk following 15 740 single-brand hybrid hip arthroplasties: a cohort study from a National Joint Registry

This retrospective cohort study of a National Joint Registry data examines survival time to revision following the commonest brand of primary hybrid THA, exploring risk factors independently associated with failure. Overall 5-year revision was 1.56%. In the final adjusted model, revision risk was significantly higher with standard polyethylene (PE) liners (metal-on-PE: hazard ratio [HR]=2.52, P=0.005, ceramic-on-PE: HR=2.99, P=0.025) when compared to metal-on-highly-cross-linked (XL) PE. Risk of revision with ceramic-on-ceramic bearings was borderline significant (HR=1.86, P=0.061). A significant interaction between age and acetabular shell type (solid or multi-hole) was found (P=0.022), suggesting that solid shells performed significantly better in younger patients. In summary, we found that there were significant differences in implant failure between different bearing surfaces and shell types after adjusting for a range of covariates.

Uncemented third-generation ceramic-on-ceramic total hip arthroplasty using metal acetabular shell with direct taper locking liner

BACKGROUND

The ceramic-on-ceramic (CoC)-bearing couple in total hip arthroplasty (THA) was developed to reduce the wear debris and osteolysis. Although the mechanical strength of third-generation ceramic has improved over previous generations, the risk of osteolysis and ceramic fracture is still an important concern.

METHODS

We studied 124 uncemented THAs with third-generation CoC-bearing couple implanted between 2000 and 2004. The ceramic liner and head were secured with the direct taper locking mechanism. One hundred and eleven hips were followed-up for minimum of 8 years, with an average follow-up period of 10.1 years (range 8.0-12.8 years). Patients were evaluated with a particular emphasis on the prevalence of the osteolysis and the ceramic fracture.

RESULTS

The survivorship with the end point as implant revision for any reason was 94.9 % (95 % confidence intervals 90.0-99.3 %) at 12.8 years. Revisions were performed because of one ceramic liner fracture, three dislocations, and two deep infections. No radiographic evidence of wear or osteolysis was observed. The preoperative Merle d'Aubigne and Postel hip score increased from 11.6 to 17.1.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients, who received third-generation CoC THA had no detectable wear and osteolysis. One ceramic fracture occurred, and the main reason for revision was dislocation.

Independent predictors of failure up to 7.5 years after 35 386 single-brand cementless total hip replacements

The popularity of cementless total hip replacement (THR) has surpassed cemented THR in England and Wales. This retrospective cohort study records survival time to revision following primary cementless THR with the most common combination (accounting for almost a third of all cementless THRs), and explores risk factors independently associated with failure, using data from the National Joint Registry for England and Wales. Patients with osteoarthritis who had a DePuy Corail/Pinnacle THR implanted between the establishment of the registry in 2003 and 31 December 2010 were included within analyses. There were 35 386 procedures. Cox proportional hazard models were used to analyse the extent to which the risk of revision was related to patient, surgeon and implant covariates. The overall rate of revision at five years was 2.4% (99% confidence interval 2.02 to 2.79). In the final adjusted model, we found that the risk of revision was significantly higher in patients receiving metal-on-metal (MoM: hazard ratio (HR) 1.93, p < 0.001) and ceramic-on-ceramic bearings (CoC: HR 1.55, p = 0.003) compared with the best performing bearing (metal-on-polyethylene). The risk of revision was also greater for smaller femoral stems (sizes 8 to 10: HR 1.82, p < 0.001) compared with mid-range sizes. In a secondary analysis of only patients where body mass index (BMI) data were available (n = 17 166), BMI ≥ 30 kg/m2 significantly increased the risk of revision (HR 1.55, p = 0.002). The influence of the bearing on the risk of revision remained significant (MoM: HR 2.19, p < 0.001; CoC: HR 2.09, p = 0.001). The risk of revision was independent of age, gender, head size and offset, shell, liner and stem type, and surgeon characteristics.

We found significant differences in failure between bearing surfaces and femoral stem size after adjustment for a range of covariates in a large cohort of single-brand cementless THRs. In this study of procedures performed since 2003, hard bearings had significantly higher rates of revision, but we found no evidence that head size had an effect. Patient characteristics, such as BMI and American Society of Anesthesiologists grade, also influence the survival of cementless components.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2013;95-B:747–57.

Ceramic liner fatigue fracture: 3-D CT findings in a late recurrent THA dislocation

Dislocation is one of the most common complications of total hip arthroplasty (THA). To the authors' knowledge, late recurrent dislocation of a THA with a ceramic-on-ceramic coupling secondary to fatigue fracture of the ceramic liner has never been described. A 76-year-old woman with right hip osteoarthritis underwent cementless modular THA with a ceramic-on-ceramic coupling. Approximately 10 years postoperatively, she experienced right hip pain with no trauma, which resolved in 14 days. Family members reported that the patient had shown a progressive cognitive and muscular decline in the previous months. Six months later, the patient was admitted for THA dislocation, which was immediately reduced. Computed tomography revealed that the right acetabular component had a retroversion of 4° and an inclination angle of 45°. An orthopedic brace was applied, but dislocation recurred 2 days after discharge. A 3-dimensional CT reconstruction showed a fracture of the ceramic liner in the posterolateral region. The patient underwent revision surgery, and the ceramic liner breakage was confirmed. After removal of the acetabular components, a cemented polyethylene cup was implanted. The stability of the stem was verified. The existing modular neck was replaced with a chromium-cobalt neck, and a new ceramic head was applied. At 7-month follow-up, the patient had good functional recovery with no hip instability. Fatigue failure of a ceramic liner should be considered as responsible for late dislocation after ceramic-on-ceramic THA. As part of the diagnostic strategy, 3-dimensional CT reconstruction should be used to evaluate ceramic liner breakage.

Risk factors for revision of primary total hip arthroplasty: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Numerous papers have been published examining risk factors for revision of primary total hip arthroplasty (THA), but there have been no comprehensive systematic literature reviews that summarize the most recent findings across a broad range of potential predictors.

METHODS

We performed a PubMed search for papers published between January, 2000 and November, 2010 that provided data on risk factors for revision of primary THA. We collected data on revision for any reason, as well as on revision for aseptic loosening, infection, or dislocation. For each risk factor that was examined in at least three papers, we summarize the number and direction of statistically significant associations reported.

RESULTS

Eighty-six papers were included in our review. Factors found to be associated with revision included younger age, greater comorbidity, a diagnosis of avascular necrosis (AVN) as compared to osteoarthritis (OA), low surgeon volume, and larger femoral head size. Male sex was associated with revision due to aseptic loosening and infection. Longer operating time was associated with revision due to infection. Smaller femoral head size was associated with revision due to dislocation.

CONCLUSIONS

This systematic review of literature published between 2000 and 2010 identified a range of demographic, clinical, surgical, implant, and provider variables associated with the risk of revision following primary THA. These findings can inform discussions between surgeons and patients relating to the risks and benefits of undergoing total hip arthroplasty.

Ceramic-on-ceramic total hip arthroplasty: incidence and risk factors of bearing surface-related noises in 125 patients

The ceramic-on-ceramic bearing surface has high wear resistance and good biocompatibility in total hip arthroplasty (THA). However, the postoperative noise problem has been an important issue. The purpose of this retrospective study was to determine the incidence and risk factors of bearing surface-related noises in patients with third-generation ceramic-on-ceramic THAs. One hundred twenty-five patients (143 hips) with ceramic-on-ceramic THAs were included in the study and followed to obtain noise and functional results. Patient factors, including sex, age, height, weight, body mass index, diagnosis, and postoperative range of motion, and surgical factors, including cup inclination, ceramic head size and length, and size of cup related to noises, were recorded. Mean follow-up was 4.2 years (range, 2-10 years). Mean Harris Hip Score was 94 points (range, 68-100 points) at latest follow-up. One (0.8%) patient had radiological evidence of osteolysis, and 4 (3.2%) patients had hip dislocation. No hip sustained a fracture of the ceramic component. Eight (6.4%) patients developed noise at their hips, including clicking in 4, grinding in 2, and snapping in 2. No patient developed squeaking hips or underwent revision surgery because of noisy hips. Younger patients (P=.01), a diagnosis of osteonecrosis (P=.014), a 28-mm ceramic head (P=.042), and a higher hip range of motion postoperatively (P=.001) were related to noise in ceramic-on-ceramic THAs. The study showed third-generation ceramic-on-ceramic THAs had a low incidence of noise problems. However, long-term follow-up is necessary to determine the clinical relevance.

Development of ceramic-on-ceramic implants for total hip arthroplasty

Over the past three decades, alumina ceramic, now in its third/fourth generation, has been markedly improved in terms of its mechanical properties, including purity, grain microstructure, and burst strength. In the clinic, it is particularly suitable for young and for very active patients. This paper discusses the development and characteristics of different kinds of ceramics. In addition, ceramics in the third/fourth generation which are used in total hip arthroplasty clinically are reviewed in detail.

Causes of failure of ceramic-on-ceramic and metal-on-metal hip arthroplasties

BACKGROUND

Few large series of hard bearing surfaces have reported on reasons for early failure. A number of unique mechanisms of failure, including fracture, squeaking, and adverse tissue reactions, have been reported with these hard bearing surfaces. However, the incidence varies among the published studies.

QUESTIONS/PURPOSES

To confirm the incidences, we identified the etiologies of early failures of hard-on-hard bearing surfaces for ceramic-on-ceramic and metal-on-metal THAs.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed records of 2907 THAs with hard-on-hard bearing surfaces implanted between 1996 and 2009; 1697 (58%) had ceramic-on-ceramic and 1210 (42%) had metal-on-metal bearing surfaces. We recorded bearing-related complications and compared them to nonspecific reasons for revision THA. The minimum followup of the ceramic-on-ceramic and metal-on-metal cohorts was 6 months (mean, 48 months; range, 6-97 months) and 24 months (mean, 60 months; range, 24-178 months), respectively.

RESULTS

The overall revision rate for ceramic-on-ceramic THA was 2.2% (38 of 1697), with aseptic loosening accounting for 55% of revisions (femur or acetabulum). The bearing accounted for 13% of the revisions in the ceramic-on-ceramic THA cohort. The overall metal-on-metal revision rate was 5.4% (65 of 1210), 17 involving adverse tissue reactions related to the metal-on-metal bearing surface (17 of 1210, 1.4% of cases; 17 of 65, 26% of revisions).

CONCLUSIONS

Twenty-six percent of the revisions from metal-on-metal and 13% of ceramic-on ceramic were bearing related. The overall short- to medium-term revision rate was 2.2% and 5.4% for ceramic-on-ceramic and metal-on-metal, respectively. The most common etiology of failure was loosening of the femoral or acetabular components.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level IV, therapeutic study. See the Guidelines for Authors for a complete description of level of evidence.

Metal-on-metal or metal-on-polyethylene for total hip arthroplasty: a meta-analysis of prospective randomized studies

BACKGROUND

There has been recent concern regarding the increased use of metal-on-metal total hip arthroplasty (MOM-THA) as an alternative to contemporary metal-on-polyethylene total hip arthroplasty (MOP-THA), and the choice remains controversial. We performed a meta-analysis to evaluate and compare metal ion concentrations, complications, reoperation rates, clinical outcomes and radiographic outcomes of MOM-THA and MOP-THA.

METHODS

We performed a systematic review of English and non-English articles identified from MEDLINE, Embase, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, PreMEDLINE and HealthSTAR. Metal ion concentrations, complications, reoperation rates and other outcomes of MOM bearings were compared with MOP bearings in THA based on relative risks, mean differences and standardized mean difference statistics.

RESULTS

Eight prospective randomized trials were identified from 1,075 citations. Our results demonstrated significantly elevated erythrocyte, serum and urine levels of metal ions (cobalt and chromium) among patients who received MOM-THA. No significant differences in titanium concentrations or total complication or reoperation rates were found between MOM-THA and MOP-THA. Clinical function scores and radiographic evaluations were similar between the two groups.

CONCLUSIONS

This analysis found insufficient evidence to identify any clinical advantage of MOM-THA compared with MOP-THA. Although cobalt and chromium concentrations were elevated after MOM-THA, there were no significant differences in total complication rates (including all-case mortality) between the two groups in the short- to mid-term follow-up period. The MOM bearing option for THA should be used with caution.

Early to mid-term results of ceramic-on-ceramic total hip replacement: analysis of bearing-surface-related complications

Ceramic-on-ceramic bearings in hip replacement have low rates of wear and are increasingly being used in young adults. Our aim was to determine the incidence of audible phenomena or other bearing-related complications. We retrospectively analysed 250 ceramic-on-ceramic hip replacements in 224 patients which had been implanted between April 2000 and December 2007. The mean age of the patients at operation was 44 years (14 to 83) and all the operations were performed using the same surgical technique at a single centre. At a mean follow-up of 59 months (24 to 94), the mean Oxford hip score was 40.89 (11 to 48). There were six revisions, three of which were for impingement-related complications. No patient reported squeaking, but six described grinding or clicking, which was usually associated with deep flexion. No radiological evidence of osteolysis or migration of the components was observed in any hip. The early to mid-term results of contemporary ceramic-on-ceramic hip replacement show promising results with few concerns in terms of noise and squeaking. Positioning of the acetabular component remains critical in regard to the reduction of other impingement-related complications.

Ceramic-on-ceramic total hip arthroplasty: incidence of instability and noise

BACKGROUND

Alternative bearing materials in THA have been developed to reduce the incidence of osteolysis. Alumina-on-alumina bearings exhibit extremely low wear rates in vitro, but concerns exist regarding component impingement with the potential for dislocation and the occurrence of noise.

QUESTIONS/PURPOSES

We determined generation of squeaking and the relationship between squeaking and component position.

METHODS

We prospectively entered 436 alumina-on-alumina, cementless, primary THAs in 364 patients into our institutional database. All procedures were performed with the same surgical technique and the same implant. We obtained Harris Hip scores and a noise questionnaire and assessed radiographic component position and loosening. We determined the difference in abduction angle between squeakers and nonsqueakers. Minimum followup was 2 years (average, 3.5 years; range, 2.0-6.2 years).

RESULTS

The mean Harris hip score increased from 51.9 preoperatively to 94.4 at latest followup. Six hips underwent reoperation: four hips (1.1%) for dislocation and two (0.53%) for periprosthetic fracture after trauma. The incidence of noise of any type was 11%, with the most common type of noise being clicking or snapping. Squeaking was reported by 1.9% of patients, with no patient being revised for this phenomenon. We found no association between component position and squeaking.

CONCLUSIONS

At average 3 years followup, 98% of ceramic-on-ceramic THAs did not require a revision, with 1.1% of hips having been revised for dislocation. Fewer than 2% of patients reported hearing an audible squeak, with no association found between component position and squeaking.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level IV, therapeutic study. See Guidelines for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.