Further experimental and clinical experience with aluminum oxide endoprostheses

Salzer, M.; Zweymüller, K.; Locke, H; Zeibig, A.; Stärk, N; Plenk, H.; Punzet, G

doi:10.1002/jbm.820100604

Cited by 41 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 4 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Alumina ceramic-on-ceramic THR has been in clinical use for more than 25 years. Initial design-related complications such as fractures of the ball head and breakage of ceramic sockets [45][46][47][48][49] were reduced to a minimum by applying changes at the ball-cone junction and by improving the quality of the ceramic product. polyethylene revision cases, 22 a lower rate of degeneration of macrophages detected when alumina particles were phagocytosed instead of Co-based alloy particles, 11,35 and better chemotaxis and less necrosis of alumina-laden macrophages.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Wear debris from two different alumina-on-alumina total hip arthroplasties

Böhler

Mochida

Bauer

et al. 2000

The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery. British volume

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

W e compared wear particles from two different designs of total hip arthroplasty with polycrystalline alumina-ceramic bearings of different production periods (group 1, before ISO 6474: group 2, according to ISO 6474). The neocapsules and interfacial connective tissue membranes were retrieved after mean implantation times of 131 months and 38 months, respectively. Specimen blocks were freed from embedding media, either methylmethacrylate or paraffin and digested in concentrated nitric acid. Particles were then counted and their sizes and composition determined by SEM and energy-dispersive x-ray analysis (EDXA).The mean numbers and sizes of most alumina wear particles did not differ for both production periods, but the larger sizes of particle in group 1 point to more severe surface destruction. The increased metal wear in group 2 was apparently due to alumina-induced abrasion of the stems. In this study the concentrations of particles in the periprosthetic tissues were 2 to 22 times lower than those observed previously with polyethylene and alumina/polyethylene wear couples. [Br] 2000;82-B:901-9. J Bone Joint Surg Received 11 December 1998; Accepted after revision 20 September 1999The size, shape and composition of wear particles play a central role in the development of aseptic loosening and osteolysis in total hip replacement (THR). [1][2][3][4][5][6][7][8][9][10][11][12][13][14] Various studies have shown the good performance of the alumina ceramic-on-ceramic articular surfaces in terms of frictional behaviour, low annual rates of wear and relatively low reactivity of debris in the periprosthetic tissues, compared with polyethylene wear from metal-polyethylene couples. [15][16][17][18][19][20][21][22][23] Light-microscope studies of membranes around revised ceramic THRs reported sizes of alumina particle of between 1 and 3 m which is similar to the grain size of alumina used for production. 15,24,25 Since a size of 1 m is at the lower limit for light microscopy, more sensitive methods have been developed to evaluate submicron debris in tissue membranes. 26-28The purpose of the present study was to describe the histology of periarticular tissues around failed alumina ceramic-on-ceramic total hip prostheses and to compare the tissue concentration and physical characteristics of isolated wear particles originating from two types of Al 2 O 3 ceramic used for these THRs: 1) a series of cementless, monolithic ceramic cups with ceramic heads, produced after 1975 but before the ISO 6474; and 2) more recently manufactured ceramic inserts for a commercially pure (cp) Ti-backed acetabular cup and ceramic ball head (BIOLOX, according to ISO 6474; Ceramtec, Plochingen, Germany) with a Tialloy stem. We have compared our findings with the results from previously published studies which used identical techniques of isolation and characterisation of wear particles to analyse tissues adjacent to failed cemented and uncemented metal-polyethylene total hip prostheses. [26][27][28] Materials and Methods (Table I) Group 1. Betwee...

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Wear debris from two different alumina-on-alumina total hip arthroplasties

Böhler

Mochida

Bauer

et al. 2000

The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery. British volume

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The British surgeon Sir William Arbuthnot Lane (1856–1943) together with British Dame Agnes Gwendoline Hunt (1866–1948), the world's first orthopedic nurse, and the Belgian surgeon Albin Lambotte (1866–1955) designed a fracture plate made of stainless steel 3 . The development of implant materials continues with titanium in the 1940s and 1950s 4 through ceramics (1975) 5–9 to polymers in dentistry and in spinal applications (since the 1980s) 10,11 …”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Polyetheretherketone implant surface functionalization technologies and the need for a transparent quality evaluation system

Schaffarczyk¹,

Knaus²,

Peeters³

et al. 2020

Polymer International

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

For bone implants, osseointegration resulting in a good and fast bone–implant contact is of primary importance to secure a proper implant function and to avoid implant loosening or inflammation resulting in necessary revision surgeries causing pain to the patients and immense costs. In particular, polyetheretherketone (PEEK) is a promising implant material due to the close mechanical properties to bone, but it is entirely bio‐inert, hindering osseointegration and making surface functionalization necessary. Many different surface functionalization technologies have been reported of both physical and chemical nature. The same is true for the other prominent implant materials titanium and ceramics. Although they already have inherently better osseointegration than PEEK, they are much harder and stiffer than bone and brittle in the case of ceramics. Surface functionalization, which can be subdivided into surface coating and material modification, needs to be judged from a quality and safety viewpoint. However, a literature research resulted in the realization that no quality standard yet exists for implant surface functionalizations. This makes it difficult to near impossible to compare the safety and performance of different surface‐functionalized bone implants, clearly showing the need to establish a transparent quality evaluation system for bone implants. This perspective article gives the state of the art and then develops a quality evaluation system based on six main categories as important benchmarks for the quality of surface‐functionalized bone implant materials. A simple catalog of questions can be answered, and from the resulting scores the Safety and Performance Evidence Level (SPEL) representing the safety and quality of a given implant can be calculated as a percentage. This simple SPEL system allows an easy and transparent judgment and comparison of bone implants, ensuring the easy identification of safe and well‐performing high‐quality bone implants in the future. © 2020 The Authors. Polymer International published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of Society of Chemical Industry.

show abstract

“…Since the early 70s high-density alumina ceramic has been used as a replace ment for metallic femoral articulating components in some of the prosthetic designs [61,62]. The tribological advantage of a polyethylene/alumina configura tion over a polyethylene/metal articulating system has been demonstrated in many laboratory studies in dry and wet conditions [50,[63][64][65][66][67].…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Friction and Wear of Polymers, Ceramics and Composites in Biomedical Applications

Stachowiak

1993

Advances in Composite Tribology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Further experimental and clinical experience with aluminum oxide endoprostheses

Cited by 41 publications

References 4 publications

Wear debris from two different alumina-on-alumina total hip arthroplasties

Wear debris from two different alumina-on-alumina total hip arthroplasties

Polyetheretherketone implant surface functionalization technologies and the need for a transparent quality evaluation system

Friction and Wear of Polymers, Ceramics and Composites in Biomedical Applications

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About