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

[Partial or full component exchange in hip revision? : The relevance of off-label use and mix & match]

Off-label use is frequently practiced in hip revision arthroplasty, as there may be indications for the application of implants for purposes outside the one the manufacturers intended (i.e. large bone and soft tissue defects, obesity). Patients may also benefit from selective application of mix & match in hip revision, when the exchange of one component only is necessary and the invasiveness of surgery can be reduced. Currently, there are no formal guidelines for these situations. Therefore, within a recent EFORT initiative, evidence- and consensus-based recommendations have been developed for the safe application of off-label use and mix & match in revision hip and knee arthroplasty.

EFORT recommendations for off-label use, mix & match and mismatch in hip and knee arthroplasty

Off-label use is frequently practiced in primary and revision arthroplasty, as there may be indications for the application of implants for purposes outside the one the manufacturers intended.

Under certain circumstances, patients may benefit from selective application of mix & match. This can refer to primary hip arthroplasty (if evidence suggests that the combination of devices from different manufacturers has superior results) and revision hip or knee arthroplasty (when the exchange of one component only is necessary and the invasiveness of surgery can be reduced).

Within the EFORT ‘Implant and Patient Safety Initiative’, evidence- and consensus-based recommendations have been developed for the safe application of off-label use and mix & match in primary as well as revision hip and knee arthroplasty.

Prior to the application of a medical device for hip or knee arthroplasty off-label and within a mix & match situation, surgeons should balance the risks and benefits to the patient, obtain informed consent, and document the decision process appropriately.

Nevertheless, it is crucial for surgeons to only combine implants that are compatible. Mismatch of components, where their sizes or connections do not fit, may have catastrophic effects and is a surgical mistake.

Surgeons must be fully aware of the features of the components that they use in off-label indications or during mix & match applications, must be appropriately trained and must audit their results.

Considering the frequent practice of off-label and mix & match as well as the potential medico-legal issues, further research is necessary to obtain more data about the appropriate indications and outcomes for those procedures.

Cite this article: EFORT Open Rev 2021;6:982-1005. DOI: 10.1302/2058-5241.6.210080

Finite Element Analysis of Stress Distribution in Flat and Elevated-Rim Polyethylene Acetabular Liners

Backgroud

No study has compared flat and elevated-rim polyethylene liners in terms of stress distribution on the bearing surface. The purpose of this study was to investigate the difference in stress distribution between flat and elevated-rim polyethylene liners.

Methods

A stress analysis was performed by using the 3-dimensional finite element method. The cup was placed at an open angle of 20°, the flat liner and the liner with a 10° elevation was placed at inclination angles of 80°, 70°, and 60°.

Results

Compared with the 60° flat liner, the 80° and 70° flat liners showed higher stress at the liner edge. In the elevated-rim liner, the stress was high at the liner edge along the cup edge. When the von Mises equivalent stress was applied to each element of the liner, the high stress area (volume) was the largest for the 80° flat liner, second largest for the 80° elevated-rim liner, and third largest for the 70° flat liner. The average contact pressure also followed the same order.

Conclusions

Elevated-rim liners affect the stress distribution by increasing the area of contact. However, since elevated-rim liners exhibit high stress at the cup edge, they are likely to result in new problems including liner failure. These findings could aid surgeons in the selection of liners and determination of revision methods such as isolated liner exchange vs. acetabular cup revision for a well-fixed metal cup with a higher inclination angle in revision total hip arthroplasty.