Ceramic Femoral Head Retrieval Data

Willmann, G.

doi:10.1097/00003086-200010000-00004

Cited by 327 publications

(181 citation statements)

References 6 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

171

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…In addition, for each head size, it was determined whether bony impingement or component impingement occurred first in full flexion and in full flexion with internal rotation. Similar to previously published studies [3,39], in regards to range of motion, the amount of motion possible with flexion and flexion with internal rotation increased as femoral head size increased (Table 1). Likewise, in straight flexion, six of the seven cadavers with a 28-mm head size were limited by component impingement first, whereas with the 44-mm head size, only one of the seven cadavers had an eventual block to flexion because of component impingement.…”

Section: Resultssupporting

confidence: 89%

Ideal Femoral Head Size in Total Hip Arthroplasty Balances Stability and Volumetric Wear

Cross

Nam

Mayman

2012

HSS Journal®: The Musculoskeletal Journal of Hospital for Speci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Over the last several years, a trend towards increasing femoral head size in total hip arthroplasty to improve stability and impingement free range of motion has been observed. Purpose: The specific questions we sought to answer in our review were: (1) What are the potential advantages and disadvantages of metal-on-metal, ceramic-on-ceramic, and metal-on-polyethylene bearings? (2) What is effect that femoral head size has on joint kinematics? (3) What is the effect that large femoral heads have on bearing surface wear? Methods: A PubMed search and a review of 2012 Orthopaedic Research Society abstracts was performed and articles were chosen that directly answered components of the specific aims and that reported outcomes with contemporary implant designs or materials. Results: A review of the literature suggests that increasing femoral head size decreases the risk of postoperative dislocation and improves impingement free range of motion; however, volumetric wear increases with large femoral heads on polyethylene and increases corrosion of the stem in large metal-onmetal modular total hip arthroplasty (THA); however, the risk of potentially developing osteolysis or adverse reactions to metal debris respectively is still unknown. Further, the effect of large femoral heads with ceramic-on-ceramic THA is unclear, due to limited availability and published data. Conclusions: Surgeons must balance the benefits of larger head size with the increased risk of volumetric wear when determining the appropriate head size for a given patient.

show abstract

Section: Resultssupporting

confidence: 89%

Ideal Femoral Head Size in Total Hip Arthroplasty Balances Stability and Volumetric Wear

Cross

Nam

Mayman

2012

HSS Journal®: The Musculoskeletal Journal of Hospital for Speci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…For AL-AL bearing surfaces, most of the data concerning wear have been obtained in vitro on retrieved implants [19,38] or with studies from a hip simulator. However, we do not know if these studies accurately reproduce what happens in vivo.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Ceramic-Ceramic Bearing Decreases Osteolysis: A 20-year Study versus Ceramic-Polyethylene on the Contralateral Hip

Hernigou

Zilber

Filippini

et al. 2009

Clinical Orthopaedics &Amp; Related Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Although ceramic implants have been in use for many years and they are intended to minimize wear debris it is unknown whether alumina-on-alumina or alumina-onpolyethylene produce less wear and osteolysis. We therefore investigated wear and osteolysis on 28 bilateral arthroplasties (one ceramic-ceramic and the contralateral ceramic-polyethylene) of patients who had survived 20 years without revision and without loosening of either hip. Osteolysis was identified on anteroposterior pelvic radiographs and 3-D volume from CT scans. The number of osteolytic lesions detected with CT scan was higher than with radiographs. The number of lesions was higher on the side with the alumina-PE couple. With a similar length of followup on each side, the surface and the volume of osteolysis were consistently higher on the side with the alumina-PE couple. We found no correlation between the volume of osteolysis and the volume of estimated wear in each couple of friction. Hips with osteolysis had a lower Harris score.

show abstract

“…For metals, the major concerns are adverse tissue reactions of various descriptions and, to a lesser degree, failure of ingrowth or early loosening of components. Various authors reported the frequency of fracture of contemporary devices between 0.004% and 0.19% [27,30,31] and squeaking between 1% and 21% [3,16,28]. The incidence of major tissue reactions is unknown currently, but some believe it to be around 1% or less [2] and that of early loosening to be between 1% and 6% [11].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Causes of Failure of Ceramic-on-Ceramic and Metal-on-Metal Hip Arthroplasties

Porat

Parvızı

Sharkey

et al. 2012

Clinical Orthopaedics &Amp; Related Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

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-onmetal THAs. Methods We retrospectively reviewed records of 2907 THAs with hard-on-hard bearing surfaces implanted between 1996 and 2009; 1697 (58%) had ceramic-onceramic 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-onmetal 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 metalon-metal, respectively. The most common etiology of failure was loosening of the femoral or acetabular components.

show abstract

Ceramic Femoral Head Retrieval Data

Cited by 327 publications

References 6 publications

Ideal Femoral Head Size in Total Hip Arthroplasty Balances Stability and Volumetric Wear

Ideal Femoral Head Size in Total Hip Arthroplasty Balances Stability and Volumetric Wear

Ceramic-Ceramic Bearing Decreases Osteolysis: A 20-year Study versus Ceramic-Polyethylene on the Contralateral Hip

Causes of Failure of Ceramic-on-Ceramic and Metal-on-Metal Hip Arthroplasties

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About