Measurement of Polyethylene Wear in Total Hip Arthroplasty: Accuracy Versus Ease of Use

Kang, Joon Soon; Park, Seung Rim; Ebramzadeh, Edward; Dorr, Lawrence D.

doi:10.3349/ymj.2003.44.3.473

Cited by 37 publications

(21 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The techniques of Livermore, Charnley, and others were described and validated in the era of the monoblock, all-polyethylene, and cemented acetabular component, and different markers were selected [17-25]. The Dorr technique uses the opening face of the acetabular component as the reference and bases its measurements on a single radiograph [16].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A comparison of polyethylene wear between cobalt-chrome ball heads and alumina ball heads after total hip arthroplasty: a 10-year follow-up

2013

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Study designThis is a retrospective study comparing polyethylene wear between ceramic ball heads and metal ball heads in total hip arthroplasty.BackgroundThe ceramic-on-polyethylene bearing option has been introduced as an alternative to metal-on-polyethylene to minimize polyethylene wear debris and reduce subsequent osteolysis and aseptic loosening. However, the reported data were debatable. We designed this retrospective study to compare polyethylene wear between alumina ceramic ball heads and cobalt-chrome ball heads.MethodsBilateral simultaneous primary total hip arthroplasty was performed in 22 patients between January 2002 and December 2002, with one side using metal-on-polyethylene bearing surface and the other side using alumina ceramic-on-polyethylene bearing surface. After 10 years of follow-up, the wear rate of polyethylene liner on both sides was measured using the Dorr method and compared.ResultsThe annual wear rate of the polyethylene liner was 0.133 mm with a standard deviation of 0.045 in the metal-on-polyethylene group and 0.056 mm with a standard deviation of 0.032 in the ceramic-on-polyethylene group. The wear rate per year was significantly lower in the ceramic-on-polyethylene group (p < 0.001).ConclusionsAlthough the implication is still controversial, our study showed that the use of ceramic head lowered the liner wear rate.Clinical relevanceCeramic is harder and more resistant to scratching than cobalt-chrome. By increasing polyethylene liner survivorship and decreasing potential osteolytic response and aseptic loosening, ceramic head is a better alternative than cobalt-chrome head.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A comparison of polyethylene wear between cobalt-chrome ball heads and alumina ball heads after total hip arthroplasty: a 10-year follow-up

2013

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Devane et al 5 tested the first semiautomatic PolyWare version and determined a 3D accuracy of ±0.15 mm for 3D linear wear, whereas Kang et al 10 estimated the 2D and 3D measurement error of the software in a phantom setting to 0.15 and 0.21 mm, respectively. Ebramzadeh et al 11 concluded that the 3D measurement error (mean difference from the micrometer true value) with PolyWare was 0.10 mm (mean and median) with the use of laboratory radiographs of a phantom.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Superior accuracy of model-based radiostereometric analysis for measurement of polyethylene wear

Stilling

Kold

Raedt

et al. 2012

Bone & Joint Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ObjectivesThe accuracy and precision of two new methods of model-based radiostereometric analysis (RSA) were hypothesised to be superior to a plain radiograph method in the assessment of polyethylene (PE) wear.MethodsA phantom device was constructed to simulate three-dimensional (3D) PE wear. Images were obtained consecutively for each simulated wear position for each modality. Three commercially available packages were evaluated: model-based RSA using laser-scanned cup models (MB-RSA), model-based RSA using computer-generated elementary geometrical shape models (EGS-RSA), and PolyWare. Precision (95% repeatability limits) and accuracy (Root Mean Square Errors) for two-dimensional (2D) and 3D wear measurements were assessed.ResultsThe precision for 2D wear measures was 0.078 mm, 0.102 mm, and 0.076 mm for EGS-RSA, MB-RSA, and PolyWare, respectively. For the 3D wear measures the precision was 0.185 mm, 0.189 mm, and 0.244 mm for EGS-RSA, MB-RSA, and PolyWare respectively. Repeatability was similar for all methods within the same dimension, when compared between 2D and 3D (all p > 0.28). For the 2D RSA methods, accuracy was below 0.055 mm and at least 0.335 mm for PolyWare. For 3D measurements, accuracy was 0.1 mm, 0.2 mm, and 0.3 mm for EGS-RSA, MB-RSA and PolyWare respectively. PolyWare was less accurate compared with RSA methods (p = 0.036). No difference was observed between the RSA methods (p = 0.10).ConclusionsFor all methods, precision and accuracy were better in 2D, with RSA methods being superior in accuracy. Although less accurate and precise, 3D RSA defines the clinically relevant wear pattern (multidirectional). PolyWare is a good and low-cost alternative to RSA, despite being less accurate and requiring a larger sample size.

show abstract

“…Surprisingly, the mean error of the Dorr technique was much less in our study than in the above-mentioned studies (Table 1). Interestingly, a modification of the Dorr method taking into account the wear direction has been published recently 25 . Unfortunately, …”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Wear Measurement of Retrieved Polyethylene Abg 1 Cups by Universal-Type Measuring Microscope and X-Ray Methods

Gallo¹,

Havranek²,

Cechová³

et al. 2006

Biomed Pap Med Fac Univ Palacky Olomouc Czech Repub

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background:Polyethylene wear is considered a most important part of periprosthetic osteolysis development. Thus, its measurement is central to contemporary orthopaedics.Aims: The aim of this paper was to compare the accuracy of three radiographic techniques for wear measurement. Secondly, the influence of the abduction angle of the cup on measurement accuracy was investigated.Methods: Wear was measured manually in 80 patients by a single observer according to the Livermore, Charnley, and Dorr description. A multi-component statistical analysis was used to test the hypothesis that the Livermore technique was superior. In vitro data obtained from a Universal-type measuring microscope served as a gold standard.Results: In vitro measurements showed an average linear wear of 0.363 mm per year (0.000-0.939, SD 0.241) with a corresponding volumetric wear rate of 161 mm 3 per year (0-467, SD 118.2). The Livermore technique showed the least deviation from the optical reference standard and a superior position from the viewpoint of error analysis but the correlation coefficient was slightly less (r = 0.761) than for the Dorr and Charnley techniques (r = 0.795 and r = 0.778, respectively). In addition, the mean error of the Dorr method differed significantly from zero (p = 0.036). Overall, the Livermore technique was the most accurate method for polyethylene wear measurement regardless of the abduction angle of the cup.Conclusions: The Livermore technique performed manually was more accurate than the Charnley and Dorr methods. Nevertheless, we consider the Dorr technique an adequate tool for day-to-day wear measurements, mainly due to its simplicity.

show abstract

Measurement of Polyethylene Wear in Total Hip Arthroplasty: Accuracy Versus Ease of Use

Cited by 37 publications

References 0 publications

A comparison of polyethylene wear between cobalt-chrome ball heads and alumina ball heads after total hip arthroplasty: a 10-year follow-up

A comparison of polyethylene wear between cobalt-chrome ball heads and alumina ball heads after total hip arthroplasty: a 10-year follow-up

Superior accuracy of model-based radiostereometric analysis for measurement of polyethylene wear

Wear Measurement of Retrieved Polyethylene Abg 1 Cups by Universal-Type Measuring Microscope and X-Ray Methods

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About