Risk Factors for Ceramic Liner Fracture after Total Hip Arthroplasty

Traina, Francesco; Fine, Marcello De; Bordini, Barbara; Toni, Aldo

doi:10.5301/hip.2012.10339

Cited by 55 publications

(38 citation statements)

References 34 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…We were not able to find variables related to breakage of ceramic components (BMI, activity level, cup and head diameter) ( Table 4). This differs from the Traina et al [34] and Elkins et al [10] studies in which obesity and cup malpositioning were found to contribute to breakage. This study was not designed to provide data regarding cup orientation, which may explain why none of the factors investigated were associated with bulk ceramic rupture considering component orientation as a cofounding factor.…”

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 54%

Do the Reasons for Ceramic-on-ceramic Revisions Differ From Other Bearings in Total Hip Arthroplasty?

Migaud

Putman

Kern

et al. 2016

Clinical Orthopaedics &Amp; Related Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 54%

Do the Reasons for Ceramic-on-ceramic Revisions Differ From Other Bearings in Total Hip Arthroplasty?

Migaud

Putman

Kern

et al. 2016

Clinical Orthopaedics &Amp; Related Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…A number of high-quality studies, both clinical and radiological, support the statement that XLPE liners show superior mid-and long-term clinical performance when compared with CPE liners [8,12,14,26,30,40]. There is also strong evidence derived from head-to-head clinical comparisons of XLPE liners made by different manufacturers [44].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 77%

Oxidized Zirconium Head on Crosslinked Polyethylene Liner in Total Hip Arthroplasty: A 7- to 12-year In Vivo Comparative Wear Study

Karidakis

Karachalios

2015

Clinical Orthopaedics &Amp; Related Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Osteolysis resulting from wear debris production from the bearing surfaces is a major factor limiting long-term survival of hip implants. Oxidized zirconium head on crosslinked polyethylene (XLPE) is a modern bearing coupling. However, midterm in vivo wear data of this coupling are not known. Questions/purposes The purpose of this study was to investigate in vivo whether the combination of an oxidized zirconium femoral head on XLPE produces less wear than a ceramic head on XLPE or a ceramic head on conventional polyethylene (CPE) couplings and whether any of these bearing combinations results in higher hip scores. Methods Between 2003 and 2007, we performed 356 total hip arthroplasties in 288 patients; of those, 199 (69.1%) patients (199 hips) were enrolled in what began as a randomized trial. Unfortunately, after the 57 th patient, the randomization process was halted because of patients' preference for the oxidized zirconium bearing instead of the ceramic after (as they were informed by the consent form), and after that, alternate allocation to the study groups was performed. Hips were allocated into four groups: in Group A, a 28-mm ceramic head on CPE was used; in Group B, a 28-mm ceramic head on XLPE; in Group C, a 28-mm Oxinium head on XLPE; and in Group D, a 32-mm Oxinium head on XLPE. The authors prospectively collected in vivo wear data (linear wear, linear wear rate, volumetric wear, and volumetric wear rate) using PolyWare software. Preoperative and postoperative clinical data, including Harris and Oxford hip scores, were also collected at regular intervals. Of those patients enrolled, 188 (95%) were available for final followup at a minimum of 7 years (mean, 9 years; range, 7-12 years). Results All bearing surfaces showed a varying high bedding-in effect (plastic deformation of the liner) up to the second postoperative year. At 5 years both oxidized zirconium on XLPE groups showed lower (p \ 0.01) volumetric wear (mean ± SD mm 3 ) and volumetric wear rates (mean ± SD mm 3 /year) ( Res (2015) 473:3836-3845 DOI 10.1007 Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research ® A Publication of The Association of Bone and Joint Surgeons® (Group C: 356 ± 64 to 215 ± 54 mm 3 /year, Group D: 354 ± 50 to 210 ± 64 mm 3 /year) when compared with ceramic on CPE (Group A: 895 ± 131 to 380 ± 80 mm 3 /year) and ceramic on XLPE (Group B: 1625 ± 253 to 480 ± 101 mm 3 /year) groups. When wear rates of both oxidized zirconium groups were compared, no differences were found at any time interval with the numbers available. Two hips (one from Group A and one from Group B) are scheduled for revision as a result of wear and osteolysis. There were no differences in hip scores among the groups with the numbers available. Conclusions In this study, in vivo wear parameters were lower when the combination of an oxidized zirconium head on XLPE liner was used at an average of 9 years (range, 7-12 years) followup. Further larger-scale clinical studies should confirm these findings and evaluate osteolysis and revision rates...

show abstract

“…More wear-resistant ceramic-on-ceramic (CoC) articulations and alumina-on-alumina articulations with a lower coefficient of friction (0.09) compared with metal-on-polyethylene articulations (0.21) have drawn attention as attractive new alternatives for younger and more active patients based on their ability to avoid or significantly reduce problems associated with wear debris particles from polyethylene components67). Although the fracture rate of third-generation ceramic components has been reduced to 0.004%, concerns about the safety of CoC bearings remain because fractures of ceramic liners or heads have been reported after THA using CoC articulations8910).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Revision Total Hip Arthroplasty after Ceramic Bearing Fractures in Patients Under 60-years Old; Mid-term Results

Lee

Min

et al. 2018

Hip & Pelvis

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

PurposeAlthough advances in technology have reduced the risk of ceramic implant fractures in total hip arthroplasty, these injuries do occur and their treatment remains challenging. There is a lack of studies reporting on the effectiveness of ceramic components in revision hip arthroplasty after ceramic bearing fracture. The aim of this study is to evaluate clinical and radiologic outcomes of revision surgery with ceramic-on-ceramic components after ceramic bearing fractures in young (i.e., under 60 years old) and active patients.Materials and MethodsEight patients who, from May 2004 to November 2011, underwent ceramic-on-ceramic revision surgery following a ceramic component fracture and had more than 6 years follow up were enrolled in this study. All eight patients were male with mean ages at first and revision surgeries of 39 years (range, 31–50 years) and 43.8 years (range, 33–60 years), respectively. There were 6 and 2 cases of ceramic liner and ceramic head fractures, respectively. The average time from the first operation to revision surgery was 54.3 months (range, 9–120 months), and the average follow up period was 9.7 years (range, 6–13.3 years).ResultsAt the last follow up, all patients showed improvement in Harris hip score and pain relief and there were no cases of loosening or osteolysis.ConclusionRevision total hip arthroplasty using ceramic-on-ceramic components after ceramic component fracture is a feasible and appropriate surgical option in young and active patients.

show abstract

Risk Factors for Ceramic Liner Fracture after Total Hip Arthroplasty

Cited by 55 publications

References 34 publications

Do the Reasons for Ceramic-on-ceramic Revisions Differ From Other Bearings in Total Hip Arthroplasty?

Do the Reasons for Ceramic-on-ceramic Revisions Differ From Other Bearings in Total Hip Arthroplasty?

Oxidized Zirconium Head on Crosslinked Polyethylene Liner in Total Hip Arthroplasty: A 7- to 12-year In Vivo Comparative Wear Study

Revision Total Hip Arthroplasty after Ceramic Bearing Fractures in Patients Under 60-years Old; Mid-term Results

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About