FIVE YEAR OUTCOMES OF CERAMIC-ОN-CERAMIC AND CERAMIC-ОN-POLYETHYLENE BEARINGS IN HIP JOINT REPLACEMENT

Cover Page


Cite item

Abstract

In view of the increasing number of hip joint replacement volume there remains the key issue of improving prosthesis survivorship which directly depends on the friction couple.

 Material and methods. The authors have analyzed five year outcomes of two bearing types (head and insert) used in hip replacement: ceramic-on-ceramic (CoC) in 324 patients and ceramic-on-polyethylene (CoP) in 300 patients. Totally 550 patients were operated in the period starting 2010 till 2014, including 74 patients underwent bilateral hip replacement. The authors divided patients based on gender and also into three age groups: 20-40, 41-60 and 61-80 years old. The largest group comprised 156 women aged 41-60 years (28.4%). Additional grouping of patients was made based on gender, age and bearing diameter.36 mm diameter bearing was characterized of the most frequent use. Functional outcomes were assessed by Harris Hip Score. Statistical analysis was made with Statistica 10 software. Statistical significant was observed at p<0.05.

Results.28 mm diameter bearing were rarely (19.5%) applied and mainly in women which is related to need for use of smaller acetabulum components and inability to implant a larger insert.36 mm diameter bearing were used most frequently, CoC articulation of36 mm was used in men in 34% of cases and in women – in 18.12% of cases.40 mm articulations were implanted in women two times less than in men which is related to a smaller diameter of acetabulum in women. Generally, CoC bearings were implanted more often in men which can be explained by a bigger social demand as well as a higher anti-luxation stability of large diameter bearings. Dislocations of implants occurred in 5 (0.91%) patients: in 4 patients with CoP bearingand in one patient with CoC articulation. Four revision procedures (0.64%) were made due to deep periprosthetic infection: two surgeries in each group. Harris Hip Score evaluation in CoC group demonstrated excellent and good outcomes in 99.2% of cases, and in CoP group – in 97.5% of cases.

Conclusion. The authors observed no ceramic fractures or acoustic effects during 60 months follow up. It’s reasonable to increase CoC bearing diameter to achieve a better anti-luxation effect. CoC bearing selection should depend on patient’s activity and social demands but not only on the age. Based on study observations the authors forecast a higher survivorship of CoC couple within 15-20 years and expect to prove this conclusion in further studies. 

About the authors

V. Yu. Murylev

I. M. Sechenov First Moscow State Medical University;
S.P. Botkin Moscow City Clinical Hospital

Author for correspondence.
Email: nmuril@yandex.ru
Valery Yu. Murylev – Dr. Sci. (Med.), Professor, Professor of Department of Traumatology, Orthopaedics and Disaster Surgery, Sechenov First Moscow State Medical University; Head of the Moscow City Center of Bone and Joint Replacement at Botkin City Clinical Hospital Russian Federation

G. M. Kavalersky

I. M. Sechenov First Moscow State Medical University

Email: fake@neicon.ru

Gennady M. Kavalersky – Dr. Sci. (Med.), Professor, Cheaf of Department of Traumatology, Orthopaedics and Disaster Surgery 

8-2, ul. Trubetskaya, Moscow, 119991

Russian Federation

D. I. Terentiev

S.P. Botkin Moscow City Clinical Hospital

Email: fake@neicon.ru

Dmitry I. Terentiev – cand. Sci. (med.), orthopedic surgeon Disaster Surgery 

5, 2-nd Botkinskiy proezd, Moscow, 125284

Russian Federation

Y. A. Rukin

I. M. Sechenov First Moscow State Medical University

Email: fake@neicon.ru

Yaroslav A. Rukin – Cand. Sci. (Med.), Assistant Professor of Department of Traumatology, Orthopaedics and Disaster Surgery

Russian Federation

P. M. Elizarov

I. M. Sechenov First Moscow State Medical University

Email: fake@neicon.ru

Pavel M. Elizarov – Cand. Sci. (Med.), Assistant Professor of Department of Traumatology, Orthopedics and Disaster Surgery 

8-2, ul. Trubetskaya, Moscow, 119991

Russian Federation

A. V. Muzychenkov

I. M. Sechenov First Moscow State Medical University

Email: fake@neicon.ru

Aleksey V. Muzychenkov – assistant of Department of Traumatology, Orthopedics and Disaster Surgery 

8-2, ul. Trubetskaya, Moscow, 119991

Russian Federation

References

  1. Коваленко А.Н., Шубняков И.И., Тихилов Р.М., Чёрный А.Ж. Обеспечивают ли новые и более дорогие имплантаты лучший результат эндопротезирования тазобедренного сустава? Травматология и ортопедия России. 2015;(1):5-20. doi: 10.21823/2311-2905-2015-0-1-5-20.
  2. Шубняков И.И., Тихилов Р.М., Гончаров М.Ю., Карпухин А.С., Мазуренко А.В., Плиев Д.Г., Близнюков В.В. Достоинства и недостатки современных пар трения эндопротезов тазобедренного сустава (обзор иностранной литературы). Травматология и ортопедия России. 2010;(3):147-156.
  3. Amstutz H.C., Le Duff M.J., Beaule P.E. Prevention and treatment of dislocation after total hip replacement using large diameter balls. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2004;(429):108-116.
  4. Bal B.S., Garino J., Ries M., Rahaman M.N. A review of ceramic bearing materials in total joint arthroplasty. Hip Int. 2007;17:21-30.
  5. Bistolfi A., Crova M., Rosso F., Titolo P., Ventura S., Massazza G. Dislocation rate after hip arthroplasty within the first postoperative year: 36 mm versus 28 mm femoral heads. Hip Int. 2011;21(5):559-64. doi: 10.5301/HIP.2011.8647.
  6. Buttaro M.A., Zanotti G., Comba F.M., Piccaluga F. Primary Total hip arthroplasty with fourth-generation ceramic-on-ceramic: analysis of complications in 939 consecutive cases followed for 2-10 years. J Arthroplasty. 2017;32(2):480-486. doi: 10.1016/j.arth.2016.07.032.
  7. Carnes K.J., Odum S.M., Troyer J.L., Fehring T.K. Cost Analysis of Ceramic Heads in Primary Total Hip Arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2016;98(21):1794-1800. doi: 10.2106/JBJS.15.00831
  8. D’Antonio J.A., Capello W.N., Manley M.T., Naughton M., Sutton K. Alumina ceramic bearings for total hip arthroplasty: Five-year results of a prospective randomized study. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2005;(436):164-171.
  9. Dansk Hoftealloplastik Register Årsrapport 2011. Режим доступа: http://danskhoftealloplastikregister.dk/wpcontent/uploads/2015/12/DHR-Aarsrapport_2011-t_ web.pdf. (дата обращения: 24.11.2016).
  10. Ha Y.C., Kim S.Y., Kim H.J., Yoo J.J., Koo K.H. Ceramic liner fracture after cementless alumina-on-alumina total hip arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2007;458:106-110. doi: 10.1097/BLO.0b013e3180303e87
  11. Hamadouche M., Boutin P., Daussange J., Bolander M.E., Sedel L. Alumina-on-alumina total hip arthroplasty: A minimum 18.5 year follow-up study. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2002;84-A:69-77.
  12. Hamilton W.G., McAuley J.P., Dennis D.A., Murphy J.A., Blumenfeld T.J., Politi J. THA with Delta ceramic on ceramic: results of a multicenter investigational device exemption trial. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2010;468:358-366. doi: 10.1007/s11999-009-1091-4.
  13. Hu D., Tie K., Yang X., Tan Y., Alaidaros M., Chen L. Comparison of ceramic-on-ceramic and metal-onpolyethylene bearing surfaces in total hip arthroplasty: meta-analyses of randomized controlled studies. J Orthop Surg Res. 2015;10:22. doi: 10.1186/s13018-015-0163-2.
  14. Hummel M.T., Malkani A.L., Yakkanti M.R., Baker D.L. Decreased dislocation after revision total hip arthroplasty using larger femoral head size and posterior capsular repair. J Arthroplasty. 2009;24(6 Suppl):73-76. doi: 10.1016/j.arth.2009.04.026.
  15. Kim Y.S., Kim Y.H., Hwang K.T., Choi I.Y. Isolated acetabular revision hip arthroplasty with the use of uncemented cup. J Arthroplasty. 2009;24:1236-1240. doi: 10.1016/j.arth.2009.05.032.
  16. Lachiewicz P.F., Heckman D.S., Soileau E.S., Mangla J., Martell J.M. Femoral head size and wear of highly crosslinked polyethylene at 5 to 8 years. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2009;467:3290-3296. doi: 10.1007/s11999-009-1038-9.
  17. Lombardi A.V.Jr, Skeels M.D., Berend K.R., Adams J.B., Franchi O.J. Do large heads enhance stability and restore native anatomy in primary total hip arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2011;469:1547-1553. doi: 10.1007/s11999-010-1605-0.
  18. Perka C., Haschke F., Tohtz S. Luxationen nach Hüftendoprothetik. Z Orthop Unfall. 2012;150(2):e89-e105. doi: 10.1055/s-0031-1298419.
  19. Sadoghi P., Liebensteiner M., Agreiter M., Leithner A., Böhler N., Labek G. Revision surgery after total joint arthroplasty: A complication-based analysis using worldwide arthroplasty registers. J Arthroplasty. 2013; 28(8):1329-1332. doi: 10.1016/j.arth.2013.01.012.
  20. The New Zealand joint registry sixteen year report January 1999 to December 2014. Режим доступа: http://nzoa. org.nz/system/files/NJR%2013%20Year%20Report. Pdf. (дата обращения: 24.11.2016).
  21. Toni A., Traina F., Stea S., Sudanese A., Visentin M., Bordini B., Squarzoni S. Early diagnosis of ceramic liner fracture. Guidelines based on a twelve-year clinical experience. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2006;88-A (Suppl. 4):55-63. doi: 10.2106/JBJS.F.00587.
  22. Traina F., Tassinari E., De Fine M., Bordini B., Toni A. Revision of ceramic hip replacements for fracture of a ceramic component: AAOS exhibit selection. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2011;93(24):e147. doi: 10.2106/JBJS.K.00589.
  23. Traina F., De Fine M., Bordini B., Toni A. Risk factors for ceramic liner fracture after total hip arthroplasty. Hip Int. 2012;22(6):607-614. doi: 10.5301/HIP.2012.10339.
  24. von Knoch M., Berry D.J., Harmsen W.S., Morrey B.F. Late dislocation after total hip arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2002;84-A(11):1949-1953.
  25. Willmann G. Ceramic femoral head retrieval data. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2000;379:22-28.

Copyright (c)



This website uses cookies

You consent to our cookies if you continue to use our website.

About Cookies