2016
DOI: 10.1115/1.4033648
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Effect of CoCr Counterface Roughness on the Wear of UHMWPE in the Noncyclic RandomPOD Simulation

Abstract: Abstract

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
4
1

Citation Types

2
10
0

Year Published

2017
2017
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
5
1

Relationship

2
4

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 8 publications
(12 citation statements)
references
References 23 publications
2
10
0
Order By: Relevance
“…As the present wear results regarding the counterface surface roughness are compared with an earlier, similar study with a conventional, gamma‐nitrogen‐sterilized (25 to 40 kGy) UHMWPE (“Sulene‐PE”) and an electron‐beam‐irradiated (95 kGy) and melted (150 °C) XLPE (“Durasul”), (Saikko et al, ) it can be stated that Hypothesis 1 was supported by the results (Figure ). The result is logical as the extent of crosslinking of the present VEXLPE is likely to be between those of Sulene‐PE and Durasul (Oral et al, ).…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 77%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…As the present wear results regarding the counterface surface roughness are compared with an earlier, similar study with a conventional, gamma‐nitrogen‐sterilized (25 to 40 kGy) UHMWPE (“Sulene‐PE”) and an electron‐beam‐irradiated (95 kGy) and melted (150 °C) XLPE (“Durasul”), (Saikko et al, ) it can be stated that Hypothesis 1 was supported by the results (Figure ). The result is logical as the extent of crosslinking of the present VEXLPE is likely to be between those of Sulene‐PE and Durasul (Oral et al, ).…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 77%
“…The wear ranking is similar to that of the present Wear test no. 1 (FoF) results grouped together with Saikko et al () (Figure ), but the difference between VEXLPE and XLPE in the hip simulator study is smaller, and the difference between VEXLPE and conventional UHMWPE is larger. This may be attributable to the different methods of crosslinking.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 57%
“…The difference may somewhat affect the lubricant ingress into the contact, but since all lubricants were 'watery', viscosity was not likely to affect the wear rates. The wear mechanisms produced have however been validated in earlier papers [17][18][19]22]. The burnished appearance that dominated in all tests with a protein-containing lubricant (Figs.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 81%
“…In earlier RandomPOD studies with alpha calf serum diluted 1:1 with DW at 20 °C and polished CoCr counterfaces the mean k of gamma-sterilized (25 kGy) UHMWPE ('Sulene-PE') was 3.92 × 10 -6 mm 3 /Nm [18]. The wear of electron beam irradiated (95 kGy), heattreated, highly crosslinked UHMWPE ('Durasul') was so low that it could not be quantified with a balance of 0.01 mg resolution [22]. The former value is 3.3-fold larger compared with the mean k obtained for VEXLPE in the present study, 1.19 × 10 -6 mm 3 /Nm (p < 0.001).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The 2016 Australian Orthopaedic Association National Joint Replacement Registry (AOANJRR) [1] and the National Joint Registry (NJR) Annual Report for England, Wales, Northern Ireland and the Isle of Man [3] both cite aseptic loosening as the main reason for TKR revision at 10 years and beyond. Whilst there are many factors that influence PE wear within TKR, an increased surface roughness of the counter-face femoral component has been reported as one of the causative mechanisms of accelerated PE wear [5][6][7][8][9][10].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%