Wear particle-induced osteolysis is a major cause of aseptic loosening in THA. Increasing wear resistance of polyethylene (PE) occurs by increasing the crosslink density and early reports document low wear rates with such implants. To confirm longer-term reductions in wear we compared cross-linked polyethylene (irradiation in nitrogen, annealing) with historical polyethylene (irradiation in air) in a prospective, randomized clinical study involving 48 patients who underwent THAs with a minimum followup of 7 years (mean, 8 years; range, 7-9 years). The insert material was the only variable. The Harris hip score, radiographic signs of osteolysis, and polyethylene wear were recorded annually. Twenty-three historical and 17 moderately cross-linked polyethylene inserts were analyzed (five patients died, three were lost to followup). At 8 years, the wear rate was lower for crosslinked polyethylene (0.088 ± 0.03 mm/year) than for the historical polyethylene (0.142 ± 0.07 mm/year). This reduction (38%) did not diminish with time (33% at 5 years). Acetabular cyst formation was less frequent (39% versus 12%), affected fewer DeLee and Charnley zones (17% versus 4%), and was less severe for the cross-linked polyethylene. The only revision was for an aseptically loose cup in the historical polyethylene group. Moderately cross-linked polyethylene maintained its wear advantage with time and produced less osteolysis, showing no signs of aging at mid-term followup.

BackgroundPolyethylene wear-induced osteolysis is a major cause of implant loosening in total hip arthroplasty. New crosslinked polyethylenes are presumed to give lower wear rates, but no long-term clinical results are available yet.Patients and methods We compared basic material characteristics and MTS hip joint simulator wear rates of a crosslinked polyethylene (Duration) to those of conventional polyethylene. In a randomized double-blind 5-year clinical follow-up study, 133 hips (67 conventional, 66 Duration) in 127 patients were followed-up for an average of 5 (3-6) years. Wear rates were measured using a computer-based edge detection method. The radiographic appearances of wear-related phenomena were recorded.Results The Duration polyethylene showed a significantly lower in-vitro wear rate in the simulator study (mean 22 (SD 2.3) vs. 40 (SD 1.5) mm3/106 cycles). Also, the in-vivo wear was lower for Duration (mean 0.083 (SD 0.056) mm/year) than for conventional polyethylene (mean 0.123 (SD 0.082) mm/year). All radiographic signs of osteolysis were less frequent in the Duration group.Interpretation Our study has given a substantial body of evidence-from lower wear rates, less frequent signs of osteolysis, and higher survival rates after a mean follow-up of 5 years-that Duration provides better clinical outcomes than conventional polyethylene.

We have compared four computer-assisted methods to measure penetration of the femoral head into the acetabular component in total hip replacement. These were the Martell Hip Analysis suite 7.14, Rogan HyperOrtho, Rogan View Pro-X and Roman v1.70. The images used for the investigation comprised 24 anteroposterior digital radiographs and 24 conventional acetate radiographs which were scanned to provide digital images. These radiographs were acquired from 24 patients with an uncemented total hip replacement with a follow-up of approximately eight years (mean 8.1; 6.3 to 9.1). Each image was measured twice by two blinded observers. The mean annual rates of penetration of the femoral head measured in the eight-year single image analysis were: Martell, 0.24 (SD 0.19); HyperOrtho, 0.12 (SD 0.08); View Pro-X, 0.12 (SD 0.06); Roman, 0.12 (SD 0.07). In paired analysis of the six-month and eight-year radiographs: Martell, 0.35 (SD 0.22); HyperOrtho, 0.15 (SD 0.13); View Pro-X, 0.11 (SD 0.06); Roman, 0.11 (SD 0.07). The intra- and inter-observer variability for the paired analysis was best for View Pro-X and Roman software, with intraclass correlations of 0.97, 0.87 and 0.96, 0.87, respectively, and worst for HyperOrtho and Martell, with intraclass correlations of 0.46, 0.13 and 0.33, 0.39, respectively. The Roman method proved the most precise and the most easy to use in clinical practice and the software is available free of charge. The Martell method showed the lowest precision, indicating a problem with its edge detection algorithm on digital images.

ObjectivesPrimary aim was to compare the functional results at 3 months and 2 years between short and conventional cementless stem total hip arthroplasty (THA). Secondary aim was to determine the feasibility of a double-blind implant-related trial.DesignA prospective blinded randomised controlled multicentre trial in patients with osteoarthritis of the hip. All patients, research assistants, clinical assessors, investigators and data analysts were blinded to the type of prosthesis. Population: 150 patients between 18 and 70 years with osteoarthritis of the hip, 75 in the short stem and 75 in the conventional stem group. Mean age: 60 years (SD 7). Interventions: the Collum Femoris Preserving short stem versus the Zweymuller Alloclassic conventional stem.Main outcome measuresThe Dutch version of the Hip Disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (HOOS). Secondary outcomes measures: Harris Hip Score, the Physical Component Scale of the SF12, the Timed Up and Go test, Pain and the EQ-5D. Feasibility outcomes: continued blinding, protocol adherence and follow-up success rate.ResultsNo significant difference between the two groups. Mean HOOS total score in the short stem group increased 32.7 points from 36.6 (95% CI 32.9 to 40.2) preoperatively to 69.3 (95% CI 66.4 to 72.1) at 3 months follow-up. Mean HOOS total score in the conventional straight stem group increased 36.3 points from 37.1 (95% CI 33.9 to 40.3) preoperatively to 73.4 (95% CI 70.3 to 76.4) at 3 months follow-up. 91.2% of patients remained blinded at 2 years follow-up. Both protocol adherence and follow-up success rate were 98%.ConclusionsFunctional result at 3 months and 2 years after short stem THA is not superior to conventional cementless THA. There were more perioperative and postoperative complications in the short stem group. Direct comparison of two hip implants in a double-blinded randomised controlled trial is feasible.Trial registration numberNTR1560.