A Squeaky Reputation: The Problem May Be Design-dependent

Parvızı, Javad; Adeli, Bahar; Wong, Justin C.; Restrepo, Camilo; Rothman, Richard H.

doi:10.1007/s11999-011-1777-2

Cited by 56 publications

(43 citation statements)

References 42 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The wear was quantified by weighing the cup. Moreover, the effect of titanium third bodies was tested in the HUT-4 with AoA, as it has been assumed that titanium third bodies may be one cause for squeak clinically [7]. The particles that were put between the bearing surfaces were made using a file from a titanium acetabular shell.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…These include steep inclination angle of the acetabular cup [2], laxity of the joint [3], increased loading due to obesity or high-demand activity [4], poor lubrication or dry sliding [5], and roughening of the bearing surfaces [6] for a number of reasons, including titanium third bodies [7]. The principal difficulty is in the anticipation of the clinical relevance of each exceptional condition, or combinations of them.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Adverse condition testing with hip simulators

Saikko

2015

Biotribology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Recent clinical failures and abnormal sounds observed in certain prosthetic hip designs have directed attention to adverse condition hip simulator testing. In the present study, hip simulator wear and friction tests were made with a macroscopic separation of the bearing surfaces in the swing phase, steep acetabular cup position, increased load, poor or lacking lubrication, roughened bearing surfaces including titanium third bodies, and with combinations of these. The only conditions that resulted in squeaking were dry sliding with alumina-on-alumina and metal-on-metal, and an extreme peak load of 4 kN with serum lubricated metal-on-metal. The wear rate of metal-on-metal increased by an order of magnitude when the cup position was steep, 64 degrees, compared with the optimal position of 48 degrees. The increase of the peak load from 2 kN to 3 kN with the cup position of 48 degrees increased the running-in wear of metal-on-metal, but the steady state wear rates were equally low, of the order of 1 mg per one million cycles. Crosslinked polyethylene was the superior cup material under adverse conditions, including dry sliding and roughened femoral head.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Adverse condition testing with hip simulators

Saikko

2015

Biotribology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Some authors reported that squeaky hips are associated with younger active, heavier, and taller patients [36][37] . Parvizi et al revealed an association with a particular prosthetic design that enabled neck impingement on the metallic rim of the cup 38,39 . Similarly, Restrepo et al found a clear relationship between the prevalence of squeaking and the type of femoral component implanted 40 .…”

Section: Squeakingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Advantages and disadvantages of ceramic on ceramic total hip arthroplasty: A review

Gallo¹,

Goodman²,

Lošťák³

et al. 2012

Biomed Pap Med Fac Univ Palacky Olomouc Czech Repub

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background. Ceramic on ceramic (COC) total hip arthroplasty (THA) was developed to reduce wear debris and accordingly, the occurrence of osteolysis and aseptic loosening especially in younger patients. Based on the excellent tribological behavior of current COC bearings and the relatively low biological activity of ceramic particles, significant improvement in survivorship of these implants is expected. Methods. We used manual search to identify all relevant studies reporting clinical data on COC THAs in PubMed. The objective was to determine whether current COC THA offers a better clinical outcome and survivorship than non-COC THA. Results. Studies with early generation ceramic bearings yielded 68% to 84% mean survivorship at 20 years follow-up which is comparable with the survivorship of non-COC THAs. Studies on current ceramic bearings report a 10-year revision-free interval of 92% to 99%. These outcomes are comparable to the survivorship of the best non-COC THAs. However, there are still concerns regarding fracture of sandwich ceramic liners, squeaking, and impingement of the femoral neck on the rim of the ceramic liner leading to chipping, especially in younger and physically active patients. Conclusion. Current COC THA leads to equivalent but not improved survivorship at 10 years follow-up in comparison to the best non-COC THA. Based on this review, we recommend that surgeons weigh the potential advantages and disadvantages of current COC THA in comparison to other bearing surfaces when considering young very active patients who are candidates for THA.

show abstract

“…Of those 20%, only 1% reported a recurring squeaking noise, and no one has been revised thus far [1]. It is important to consider positioning accuracy and the quality of implant design, and not all systems behave similarly in this regard [9]. Our patients are informed about the possible rare occurrence of joint noises.…”

Section: Clinical Faceoffmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…What do you tell patients, and what should surgeons know about the current state-of-the-art on this topic? Prof. Laurent Sedel: A CoC implant with an ill-fitting cup position or design may lead to noise generation [9]. Noises generated by dry contact (a condition caused by absence of lubricating film in the CoC articulation) may increase due to interposed metallic foreign bodies.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%