Aseptic loosening and other wear-related complications are one of the most frequent late reasons for revision of total knee arthroplasty (TKA). Periprosthetic osteolysis (PPOL) predates aseptic loosening in many cases indicating the clinical significance of this pathogenic mechanism. A variety of implant-, surgery-, and host-related factors have been delineated to explain the development of PPOL. These factors influence the development of PPOL due to changes in mechanical stresses within the vicinity of the prosthetic device, excessive wear of the polyethylene liner, and joint fluid pressure and flow acting on the peri-implant bone. The process of aseptic loosening is initially governed by factors such as implant/limb alignment, device fixation quality, and muscle coordination/strength. Later large numbers of wear particles detached from TKAs trigger and perpetuate particle disease, as highlighted by progressive growth of inflammatory/granulomatous tissue around the joint cavity. An increased accumulation of osteoclasts at the bone-implant interface, an impairment of osteoblast function, mechanical stresses, and an increased production of joint fluid contribute to bone resorption and subsequent loosening of the implant. In addition, hypersensitivity and adverse reactions to metal debris may contribute to aseptic TKA failure but should be determined more precisely. Patient activity level appears to be the most important factor when the long-term development of PPOL is considered. Surgical technique, implant design, and material factors are the most important preventative factors because they influence both the generation of wear debris and excessive mechanical stresses. New generations of bearing surfaces and designs for TKA should carefully address these important issues in extensive preclinical studies. Currently, there is little evidence that PPOL can be prevented with pharmacological interventions.

The generation of wear debris is an inevitable result of normal usage of joint replacements. Wear debris particles stimulate local and systemic biological reactions resulting in chronic inflammation, periprosthetic bone destruction, and eventually, implant loosening and revision surgery. The latter may be indicated in up to 15% patients in the decade following the arthroplasty using conventional polyethylene. Macrophages play multiple roles in both inflammation and in maintaining tissue homeostasis. As sentinels of the innate immune system, they are central to the initiation of this inflammatory cascade, characterized by the release of pro-inflammatory and proosteoclastic factors. Similar to the response to pathogens, wear particles elicit a macrophage response, based on the unique properties of the cells belonging to this lineage, including sensing, chemotaxis, phagocytosis, and adaptive stimulation. The biological processes involved are complex, redundant, both local and systemic, and highly adaptive. Cells of the monocyte/ macrophage lineage are implicated in this phenomenon, ultimately resulting in differentiation and activation of bone resorbing osteoclasts. Simultaneously, other distinct macrophage populations inhibit inflammation and protect the bone-implant interface from osteolysis. Here, the current knowledge about the physiology of monocyte/macrophage lineage cells is reviewed. In addition, the pattern and consequences of their interaction with wear debris and the recent developments in this field are presented.

It is expected that the projected increased usage of implantable devices in medicine will result in a natural rise in the number of infections related to these cases. Some patients are unable to autonomously prevent formation of biofilm on implant surfaces. Suppression of the local peri-implant immune response is an important contributory factor. Substantial avascular scar tissue encountered during revision joint replacement surgery places these cases at an especially high risk of periprosthetic joint infection. A critical pathogenic event in the process of biofilm formation is bacterial adhesion. Prevention of biomaterial-associated infections should be concurrently focused on at least two targets: inhibition of biofilm formation and minimizing local immune response suppression. Current knowledge of antimicrobial surface treatments suitable for prevention of prosthetic joint infection is reviewed. Several surface treatment modalities have been proposed. Minimizing bacterial adhesion, biofilm formation inhibition, and bactericidal approaches are discussed. The ultimate anti-infective surface should be “smart” and responsive to even the lowest bacterial load. While research in this field is promising, there appears to be a great discrepancy between proposed and clinically implemented strategies, and there is urgent need for translational science focusing on this topic.