Cement-Free Bioceramic Double-Cup Endoprosthesis of the Hip-Joint

Salzer, M.; Knahr, K.; Locke, H; Stärk, N

doi:10.1097/00003086-197807000-00012

Cited by 7 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Ceramic-PE resurfacings had high failure rates due to osteolysis caused by PE debris, similar to the experience with metal on polyethylene resurfacings [13,14]. A design with a monolithic press fit ceramic cup [12,15] had a high incidence of radiographic loosening, in the absence of a rough bioactive coating or cement for fixation. Adequate fixation was achieved instead through three large pegs, but these features come at the expense of bone conservation.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 79%

“…There is, therefore, an opportunity for a ceramic femoral resurfacing head that can provide all of the bone-conserving advantages of resurfacing without the potential limitations of metal ions. Although there has been some past clinical experience with ceramic resurfacing heads for which there were no recorded instances of ceramic fracture [8][9][10][11][12], fracture is the main concern with any new ceramic prosthesis and mechanical verification is vital. In the present study, a series of computational and mechanical tests was performed to investigate whether contemporary transformation toughened ceramic composites are suitable for use in hip resurfacing devices.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Alumina ceramic has been used for femoral head resurfacing prostheses in hemiarthroplasty [8] and in total resurfacing articulating against polyethylene (PE) [9][10][11] or ceramic cups [12]. Ceramic-PE resurfacings had high failure rates due to osteolysis caused by PE debris, similar to the experience with metal on polyethylene resurfacings [13,14].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 97%

“…Ceramic bearing materials have over four decades of successful use in THR [7], with the principal advantages over metals of higher wear resistance and biocompatibility. Alumina ceramic has been used for femoral head resurfacing prostheses in hemiarthroplasty [8] and in total resurfacing articulating against polyethylene (PE) [9–11] or ceramic cups [12]. Ceramic–PE resurfacings had high failure rates due to osteolysis caused by PE debris, similar to the experience with metal-on-PE resurfacings [13, 14].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 98%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Pre-clinical evaluation of ceramic femoral head resurfacing prostheses using computational models and mechanical testing

Dickinson

Browne

Wilson³

et al. 2011

Proc Inst Mech Eng H

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Ceramic-on-ceramic hip resurfacing can potentially offer the bone conserving advantages of resurfacing while eliminating metal ion release. Thin-walled ceramic resurfacing heads are conceivable following developments in strength and reliability of ceramic materials, but verification of new designs is required. This study aimed to develop a mechanical pre-clinical analysis verification process for ceramic resurfacing heads, using the DeltaSurf prosthesis design as a case study.Finite element analysis of a range of in-vivo scenarios was used to design a series of physiologically representative mechanical tests, which were conducted to verify the strength of the prosthesis. Tests were designed to simulate ideal and worst-case in-vivo loading and support, or to allow comparison to a clinically successful metallic device.In tests simulating ideal loading and support, the prosthesis sustained a minimum load of 39 kN before fracture, and survived 10, 000, 000 fatigue cycles of (0.534 kN -5.34 kN). In worst-case tests representing a complete lack of superior femoral head bone support or pure cantilever loading of the prosthesis stem, the design demonstrated strength comparable to that of the equivalent metal device.The developed mechanical verification test programme represents an improvement in the state of the art where international test standards refer largely to total hip replacement prostheses. The case study's novel prosthesis design performed with considerable safety margins compared to extreme in-vivo loads, providing evidence that the proposed ceramic resurfacing heads should have sufficient strength to perform safely in-vivo. Similar verification tests should be designed and conducted for novel ceramic prosthesis designs in the future, leading the way to clinical evaluation.3

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 79%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 97%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 98%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Pre-clinical evaluation of ceramic femoral head resurfacing prostheses using computational models and mechanical testing

Dickinson

Browne

Wilson³

et al. 2011

Proc Inst Mech Eng H

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Also, in 1972, Nishio combined a Urist cementless acetabular cup [36] with his own femoral head of CoCrMo, which due to the growing trend for metal-on-PE designs in 1975, was substituted with the acetabular component with a PE-lined cementless socket [37,38]. In 1976, Salzer used the first ceramic-on-ceramic resurfacing endoprosthesis, which had both components made of alumina (Al 2 O 3 ) [39]. Its acetabular component had three pegs for primary stability, and the femoral cup was twisted on to the prepared head.…”

Section: Milestones Of Early Materials and Designs Of Resurfacing Art...mentioning

confidence: 99%

Towards the First Generation of Biomimetic Fixation for Resurfacing Arthroplasty Endoprostheses

Uklejewski,

Winiecki,

Dąbrowski

et al. 2024

Biomimetics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper presents advances in designs of resurfacing arthroplasty endoprostheses that occurred through their historical generations. The critical characteristics of contemporary generation hip resurfacing arthroplasty endoprostheses are given and the failures resulting from the specific generation cemented and short stem fixation of the femoral component are reviewed. On the background of these failures, the critical need arises for an alternative approach to the fixation of components of resurfacing arthroplasty leading towards the first generation of biomimetic fixation for resurfacing arthroplasty endoprostheses. The state of the art of the completed bioengineering research on the first biomimetic fixation for resurfacing arthroplasty endoprostheses is presented. This new design type of completely cementless and stemless resurfacing arthroplasty endoprostheses of the hip joint (and other joints), where endoprosthesis components are embedded in the surrounding bone via the prototype biomimetic multi-spiked connecting scaffold (MSC-Scaffold), initiates the first at all generations of biomimetic endoprostheses of diarthrodial joints.

show abstract

Double cup replacement of the hip

Freeman

1978

Arch. Orthop. Traumat. Surg.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Cement-Free Bioceramic Double-Cup Endoprosthesis of the Hip-Joint

Cited by 7 publications

References 0 publications

Pre-clinical evaluation of ceramic femoral head resurfacing prostheses using computational models and mechanical testing

Pre-clinical evaluation of ceramic femoral head resurfacing prostheses using computational models and mechanical testing

Towards the First Generation of Biomimetic Fixation for Resurfacing Arthroplasty Endoprostheses

Double cup replacement of the hip

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About