Long-Term Outcome of a Metal-on-Polyethylene Cementless Hip Resurfacing

Tan, Timothy L.; Ebramzadeh, Edward; Campbell, Patricia A.; Al-Hamad, Mariam; Amstutz, Harlan C.

doi:10.1016/j.arth.2013.08.016

Cited by 6 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 28 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Previous attempts had been made with cementless HRA with polyethylene bearings which established that secure component fixation could be achieved, but the 1st-generation polyethylene bearings were responsible for wear debris-induced osteolysis. 33 More recently a cementless version of an FDA approved MoM HRA device was made available but was pulled from the market because of a high failure rate of the acetabular component. 16 However, the benefits of using a central alignment metaphyseal stem proceeded from these early experiences.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Is a cementless fixation of the femoral component suitable for metal-on-metal hip resurfacing arthroplasty?

Amstutz

Duff

2018

HIP International

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Hip resurfacing arthroplasty (HRA) typically uses a hybrid design (cemented femoral component and cementless acetabular shell) but has recently been performed with fully cementless components. There is a paucity of information on the clinical performance of these cementless designs. Methods: The UCLA clinical scores, SF-12 quality of life scores, complication rates, survivorship and radiographic signs of loosening or gross stress shielding of 39 hips (39 male patients) implanted with cementless HRA were compared with those of 40 hips (37 male patients) implanted with hybrid HRA during the same time frame. Results: There were no significant differences in postoperative clinical and quality of life scores, complication rates, or radiographic signs of loosening between the 2 groups. The 5-year Kaplan-Meier survivorship was 97.2% for the cementless group and 100% for the hybrid group. This difference was not significant ( p = 0.3694). There were no femoral component failures in any of the 2 groups. Conclusions: At a mean follow-up of 6 years, there is no tangible difference between the performance of cementless HRA compared to hybrid HRA. The absence of learning curve associated with this device and the potential for better preservation of femoral neck bone mineral density suggest that this technology is well suited for young patients with good bone quality seeking to resume an active lifestyle including high-impact activities.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Is a cementless fixation of the femoral component suitable for metal-on-metal hip resurfacing arthroplasty?

Amstutz

Duff

2018

HIP International

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…While an advantage of this strategy is the elimination of metal wear debris, a clear challenge has been designing a thin two‐piece acetabular component that preserves the acetabular bone stock. Initial designs of polyethylene hip resurfacing used conventional polyethylene, which resulted in high rates of aseptic loosening and osteolysis . A more recent prospective study by Pritchett examined 190 hip resurfacing procedures that used a two‐piece acetabulum component that included a 3.8 mm thick highly cross‐linked polyethylene liner .…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Initial designs of polyethylene hip resurfacing used conventional polyethylene, which resulted in high rates of aseptic loosening and osteolysis. 35–37 A more recent prospective study by Pritchett examined 190 hip resurfacing procedures that used a two-piece acetabulum component that included a 3.8 mm thick highly cross-linked polyethylene liner. 16 This 3.8 mm liner had previously been used successfully in THA, 38 and the Pritchett study was similarly successful with a Kaplan-Meier survivorship of 97%.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Wear testing of a canine hip resurfacing implant that uses highly cross‐linked polyethylene

Warburton

Everingham

Helms

et al. 2017

Journal Orthopaedic Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Hip resurfacing offers advantages for young, active patients afflicted with hip osteoarthritis and may also be a beneficial treatment for adult canines. Conventional hip resurfacing uses metal-on-metal bearings to preserve bone stock, but it may be feasible to use metal-on-polyethylene bearings to reduce metal wear debris while still preserving bone. This study characterized the short-term wear behavior of a novel hip resurfacing implant for canines that uses a 1.5 mm thick liner of highly cross-linked polyethylene in the acetabular component. This implant was tested in an orbital bearing machine that simulated canine gait for 1.1 million cycles. Wear of the liner was evaluated using gravimetric analysis and by measuring wear depth with an optical scanner. The liners had a steady-state mass wear rate of 0.99 ± 0.17 mg per million cycles and an average wear depth in the central liner region of 0.028 mm. No liners, shells, or femoral heads had any catastrophic failure due to yielding or fracture. These results suggest that the thin liners will not prematurely crack after implantation in canines. This is the first hip resurfacing device developed for canines, and this study is the first to characterize the in vitro wear of highly cross-linked polyethylene liners in a hip resurfacing implant. The canine implant developed in this study may be an attractive treatment option for canines afflicted with hip osteoarthritis, and since canines are the preferred animal model for human hip replacement, this implant can support the development of metal-on-polyethylene hip resurfacing technology for human patients. © 2017 Orthopaedic Research Society. Published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Orthop Res 36:1196-1205, 2018.

show abstract

Hip Resurfacing Using Highly Cross-linked Polyethylene: Prospective Study Results at 8.5 Years

Pritchett

2016

The Journal of Arthroplasty

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Long-Term Outcome of a Metal-on-Polyethylene Cementless Hip Resurfacing

Cited by 6 publications

References 28 publications

Is a cementless fixation of the femoral component suitable for metal-on-metal hip resurfacing arthroplasty?

Is a cementless fixation of the femoral component suitable for metal-on-metal hip resurfacing arthroplasty?

Wear testing of a canine hip resurfacing implant that uses highly cross‐linked polyethylene

Hip Resurfacing Using Highly Cross-linked Polyethylene: Prospective Study Results at 8.5 Years

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About