Eighteen-Year Follow-Up Study of 2 Alternative Bearing Surfaces Used in Total Hip Arthroplasty in the Same Young Patients

Kim, Young Hoo; Park, Jang Won

doi:10.1016/j.arth.2019.09.051

Cited by 22 publications

(29 citation statements)

References 50 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…A decrease in the infection rate was even reported by Vertullo et al [34]. The clinical results, periprosthetic osteolysis, and implant survivorships are comparable with those found with ceramic-on-ceramic bearings [35,36]. As for impact sports, Abe et al did not notice an increase in wear rate with the practice of jogging [37].…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 53%

Highly Crosslinked Polyethylene Can Reduce Wear Rate in THA for High-Demand Patients: A Matched-Paired Controlled Study

Guy

Flécher

Sharma

et al. 2021

The Journal of Arthroplasty

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 53%

Highly Crosslinked Polyethylene Can Reduce Wear Rate in THA for High-Demand Patients: A Matched-Paired Controlled Study

Guy

Flécher

Sharma

et al. 2021

The Journal of Arthroplasty

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…They arrived at an overall incidence of 3%, with remarkable variations depending on implant design. 50 Kim and Park 51 studied 133 bilaterally operated patients with one CoC THA on one side and a CoXLPE THA on the other after 15 to 18 years. The clinical results were about the same on the two sides, but eight hips had an audible squeak on the side with a CoC articulation.…”

Section: Articulating Materialsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Global diversity in bearings in primary THA

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Choice of articulating materials, head size and the design of the articulation will become decisive for the long-term performance of a total hip arthroplasty (THA) and especially in terms of risk for dislocation and wear-related problems. Here we account for common alternatives based on available studies and the evidence that can be derived from them. Metal or ceramic femoral heads articulating against a liner or cup made of highly cross-linked polyethylene and ceramic-on-ceramic articulations have about similar risk for complications leading to revision, whereas the performance of metal-on-metal articulations, especially with use of big heads, is inferior. The clinical significance of problems related to ceramic-on-ceramic articulations such as squeaking remains unclear. With use of current technology ceramic fractures are rare. Large femoral heads have the potential to increase the range of hip movement before impingement occurs and are therefore expected to reduce dislocation rates. On the other hand, issues related to bearing wear, corrosion at the taper-trunnion junction and groin pain may arise with larger heads and jeopardize the longevity of THA. Based on current knowledge, 32-mm heads seem to be optimal for metal-on-polyethylene bearings. Patients with ceramic-on-ceramic bearings may benefit from even larger heads such as 36 or 40 mm, but so far there are no long-term reports that confirm the safety of bearings larger than 36 mm. Assessment of lipped liners is difficult because randomized studies are lacking, but retrospective clinical studies and registry data seem to indicate that this liner modification will reduce the rate of dislocation or revision due to dislocation without clear evidence of clinically obvious problems due to neck-liner impingement. The majority of studies support the view that constrained liners and dual mobility cups (DMC) will reduce the risk of revision due to dislocation both in primary and revision THA, the latter gaining increasing popularity in some countries. Both these devices suffer from implant-specific problems, which seem to be more common for the constrained liner designs. The majority of studies of these implants suffer from various methodological problems, not least selection bias, which calls for randomized studies preferably in a multi-centre setting to obtain sufficient power. In the 2020s, the orthopaedic profession should place more effort on such studies, as has already been achieved within other medical specialties, to improve the level of evidence in the choice of articulation when performing one of the most common in-hospital surgical procedures in Europe. Cite this article: EFORT Open Rev 2020;5:763-775. DOI: 10.1302/2058-5241.5.200002

show abstract

“…Interestingly, ceramics fracture was mostly reported to appear in the liner with percentages between 0.13 and 1.1% and only occasionally occur in the head ( 37 ). In this study, COC bearing demonstrated a significantly higher prosthesis fracture rate compared with COP bearing and all the prosthesis fracture events were reported to happen in the liner ( 9 , 17 , 20 , 21 , 23 – 25 , 27 ). Although it is easy to understand the fracture of the ceramic caused by exogenous violence, the liner fracture is rarely related to direct trauma.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 67%

“…However, it is known that COC is with lower wear rate compared with COP due to the hardness and high wettability of the character of the material itself ( 31 , 32 ). During the included RCTs, 5 studies reported the wear rate of bearing surface and all of them revealed that the mean liner wear rate in the COC group was lower than that in the COP group ( 9 , 17 , 18 , 21 , 22 ). In theory, a higher wear rate means more wear debris, which could induce osteolysis, implant loosening, or deep infection.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison of Ceramic-on-Ceramic vs. Ceramic-on-Polyethylene for Primary Total Hip Arthroplasty: A Meta-Analysis of 15 Randomized Trials

Shang

Yan

2021

Front. Surg.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: This meta-analysis aimed to compare ceramic-on-ceramic (COC) components and ceramic-on-polyethylene (COP) components during total hip arthroplasty (THA).Settings: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing COC and COP during primary THA was conducted. Electronic searches were current to March 2021.Participants: Trials were included for meta-analysis if they compared at least the bearing surfaces of COC and COP for patients undergoing primary THA and if they reported the outcomes of THA after a certain period of follow-up and only RCTs in English were included.Primary and Secondary Outcome Measures: The primary endpoints consist of audible noise, prosthesis fracture, and revision. Secondary endpoints include dislocation, deep infection, osteolysis, and prosthesis loosening. Extracted data were statistically analyzed with the Stata11.0.Results: A total of 15 RCTs containing 2,702 patients (2,813 hips) were included in this study. The audible noise [odds ratio (OR) = 5.919; 95% CI: 2.043, 17.146; p ≤ 0.001] and prosthesis fracture (OR = 35.768; 95% CI: 8.957, 142.836; p = 0.001) were significantly higher in the COC group. Hip function, revision rate, dislocation rate, deep infection rate, osteolysis rate, and prosthesis loosening rate were comparable between these two groups, while the wear rate was higher in the COP group.Conclusion: This study indicated comparable outcomes of COC and COP bearing surfaces in primary THA; high-quality RCTs with a long-term follow-up are still urgently needed to provide more evidence on the optimal bearing surfaces in primary THA.

show abstract

Eighteen-Year Follow-Up Study of 2 Alternative Bearing Surfaces Used in Total Hip Arthroplasty in the Same Young Patients

Cited by 22 publications

References 50 publications

Highly Crosslinked Polyethylene Can Reduce Wear Rate in THA for High-Demand Patients: A Matched-Paired Controlled Study

Highly Crosslinked Polyethylene Can Reduce Wear Rate in THA for High-Demand Patients: A Matched-Paired Controlled Study

Global diversity in bearings in primary THA

Comparison of Ceramic-on-Ceramic vs. Ceramic-on-Polyethylene for Primary Total Hip Arthroplasty: A Meta-Analysis of 15 Randomized Trials

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About