Retrieval Analysis of Femoral Zirconium Components in Total Knee Arthroplasty

Oxidized Zirconium versus Cobalt-Chromium in TKA: Profilometry of Retrieved Femoral Components

“…The smoother surfaces of the retrieved OxZr implants as compared with their matched CoCr counterparts were expected given data from earlier knee simulator studies [28] and from our subjective visual inspection of these types of retrieved femoral components [12,13]. Similar studies showed that CoCr retrievals were an order of magnitude rougher than pristine controls [25].…”

“…In two prior studies, we used a subjective, visual score when inspecting retrieved OxZr and CoCr femoral components [12,13]. In the current study, we limited our selection of retrieved femoral implants to a single design and manufacturer to focus the comparison between implants based primarily on the bearing material: OxZr versus CoCr.…”

Ceramics and ceramic coatings in orthopaedics

“…All metal, ceramic, and ceramic coatings can be manufactured and polished to extremely fine surface finishes for articulation devices (i.e, <20 nm R a ). In vitro hip simulator studies, along with in vivo retrievals, demonstrate that polycrystalline ceramics or hard ceramic coatings are more scratch-resistant [150,258,[476][477][478], typically have lower wear rates, and exhibit less osteolysis for self-mated bearing surfaces [247,[479][480][481][482][483][484][485][486][487][488][489] and for articulation against polyethylene [150,476,477,[490][491][492][493][494][495][496][497][498][499] than do CoCr implants. With less than half the hardness of ceramics, CoCr is particularly susceptible to third-body scratching.…”

The 2012 Mark Coventry Award: A Retrieval Analysis of High Flexion versus Posterior-stabilized Tibial Inserts

“…However, both groups demonstrated equal articular surface damage, suggesting that if patients achieving deep flexion are recreating these forces, it is not affecting the polyethylene. In keeping with the literature [12,14,20], the primary modes of damage to the articular surface of our implant series were burnishing, pitting, and scratching.…”

“…The re-creation of these forces in deep flexion was believed to have implications for wear in the posterior lateral quadrants of high flexion inserts. In general, it has been noted that the lateral compartment of the insert may be prone to greater wear as a result of abnormal flexion kinematics [12]. However, both groups demonstrated equal articular surface damage, suggesting that if patients achieving deep flexion are recreating these forces, it is not affecting the polyethylene.…”