Polyethylene liner motion in dual-mobility hip prostheses: static and dynamic radiostereometry in 16 patients 1 year after operation

Liner orientation change of dual mobility cup determined via 3D ultrasound imaging and motion analysis: A cadaver study

BACKGROUND

A mobile polyethylene liner enables the dual mobility cup (DMC) to contribute to restoring hip joint range-of-motion, decreasing wear and increasing implant stability. However, more data is required on how liner orientation changes with hip joint movement. As a first step towards better understanding liner orientation change in vivo, this cadaver study focuses on quantifying DMC liner orientation change after different hip passive movements, using ultrasound imaging and motion analysis.

HYPOTHESIS

The liner does not always go back to its initial orientation and its final orientation depends mainly on hip movement amplitude.

METHODS

3D ultrasound imaging and motion analysis were used to define liner and hip movements for four fresh post-mortem human subjects with six implanted DMC. Abduction and anteversion angles of the liner plane relative to the pelvis were measured before and after hip flexion, internal rotation, external rotation, abduction, adduction.

RESULTS

Liner orientation changes were generally defined by angle variation smaller than 5°, with the liner nearly going back to its initial orientation. However, hip flexion caused liner abduction and anteversion angle variations greater than 15°. Except for hip adduction, only weak or no correlation was found between the final angle of the liner and the maximal hip joint movement amplitude.

DISCUSSION

This study is the first attempt to quantify liner orientation change for implanted DMC via ultrasound imaging and constitutes a step forward in the understanding of liner orientation change and its relationship with hip joint movement. The hypothesis that the final liner abduction and anteversion angles depend mainly on hip movement amplitude was not confirmed, even if hip flexion was the movement generating the most liner orientation changes over 15°. This approach should be extended to in vivo clinical investigations, as measured liner angle variation could provide important support for the wear and stability claims made for DMC.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

IV; cadaveric study.

Guideline for RSA and CT-RSA implant migration measurements: an update of standardizations and recommendations

Opening remarks: These guidelines are the result of discussions within a diverse group of RSA researchers. They were approved in December 2023 by the board and selected members of the International Radiostereometry Society to update the guidelines by Valstar et al. [1]. By adhering to these guidelines, RSA studies will become more transparent and consistent in execution, presentation, reporting, and interpretation. Both authors and reviewers of scientific papers using RSA may use these guidelines, summarized in the Checklist, as a reference. Deviations from these guidelines should have the underlying rationale stated.

Five-year polyethylene cup migration and PE wear of the Anatomic Dual Mobility acetabular construct

INTRODUCTION

Dual mobility implants have been successful in reducing postoperative hip dislocation but mid-term results of cup migration and polyethylene wear are missing in the literature. Therefore, we measured migration and wear at 5-year follow-up using radiostereometric analysis (RSA).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A cohort of 44 patients (mean age 73, 36 female) with heterogeneous indications for hip arthroplasty but all with a high risk of hip dislocation received total hip replacement (THA) with The Anatomic Dual Mobility X3 monoblock acetabular construct and a highly crosslinked polyethylene liner. RSA images and Oxford Hip Scores were obtained perioperatively and 1, 2, and 5 years postoperatively. Cup migration and polyethylene wear were calculated using RSA.

RESULTS

Mean 2-year proximal cup translation was 0.26 mm (95% CI 0.17; 0.36). Proximal cup translation was stable from 1- to 5-year follow-up. Mean 2-year cup inclination (z-rotation) was 0.23° (95% CI - 0.22; 0.68) and was greater in patients with osteoporosis compared to patients without osteoporosis (p = 0.04). Using 1-year follow-up as baseline, the 3D polyethylene wear rate was 0.07 mm/year (0.05; 0.10). Oxford hip scores improved 19 (95% CI 14; 24) points from mean 21 (range 4; 39) at baseline, to 40 (9; 48) 2 years postoperatively. There were no progressive radiolucent lines > 1 mm. There was 1 revision for offset correction.

CONCLUSIONS

Anatomic Dual Mobility monoblock cups were well-fixed, the polyethylene wear rate was low, and the clinical outcomes were good until 5-year follow-up suggesting good implant survival in patients of different age groups and with heterogeneous indications for THA.

Estimation of two wear factors for total hip arthroplasty: A simulation study based on musculoskeletal modelling

BACKGROUND

Primary causes of surgical revision after total hip arthroplasty are polyethylene wear and implant loosening. These factors are particularly related to joint friction and thus patients' physical activity. Assessing implant wear over time according to patients' morphology and physical activity level is key to improve follow-up and patients' quality of life.

METHODS

An approach initially proposed for tibiofemoral prosthetic wear estimation was adapted to compute two wear factors (force-velocity, directional wear intensity) using a musculoskeletal model. It was applied on 17 participants with total hip arthroplasty to compute joint angular velocity, contact force, sliding velocity, and wear factors during common daily living activities.

FINDINGS

Differences were observed between gait, sitting down, and standing up tasks. An incremental increase of both global wear factors (time-integral) was observed during gait from slow to fast speeds (p ≤ 0.01). Interestingly, these two wear factors did not result in same trend for sitting down and standing up tasks. Compared to gait, one cycle of sitting down or standing up tends to induce higher friction-related wear but lower cross-shear-related wear. Depending on the wear factor, significant differences can be found between sitting down and gait at slow speed (p ≤ 0.05), and between sitting down (p ≤ 0.05) or standing up (p ≤ 0.05) and gait at fast speed. Furthermore, depending on the activity, wear can be fostered by joint contact force and/or sliding velocity.

INTERPRETATION

This study demonstrated the potential of wear estimation to highlight activities inducing a higher risk of implant wear after total hip arthroplasty from motion capture data.