Higher risk of 2-year cup revision of ceramic-on-ceramic versus ceramic-on-polyethylene bearing: analysis of 33,454 primary press-fit total hip arthroplasties registered in the Dutch Arthroplasty Register (LROI).

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: The influence of bearing on short-term revision in press-fit total hip arthroplasty (THA) remains under-reported. The aim of this study was to describe 2-year cup revision rates of ceramic-on-ceramic (CoC) and ceramic-on-polyethylene (CoPE). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Primary press-fit THAs with one of the three most used cups available with both CoC or CoPE bearing recorded in the Dutch Arthroplasty Register (LROI) were included (2007-2019). Primary outcome was 2-year cup revision for all reasons. Secondary outcomes were: reasons for revision, incidence of different revision procedures and use of both bearings over time. RESULTS: 2-year Kaplan-Meier cup revision rate in 33,454 THAs (12,535 CoC; 20,919 CoPE) showed a higher rate in CoC (0.67% [95% CI, 0.54-0.81]) compared to CoPE (0.44% [95% CI, 0.34-0.54]) (p = 0.004). Correction for confounders (age, gender, cup type, head size) resulted in a hazard ratio (HR) of 0.64 [95%CI, 0.48-0.87] (p = 0.019). Reasons for cup revision differed only by more cup revision due to loosening in CoC (26.2% vs.1 3.2%) (p = 0.030). For aseptic loosening a revision rate of 0.153% [95% CI, 0.075-0.231] was seen in CoC and 0.058% [95%CI 0.019-0.097] in CoPE (p = 0.007). Correction for head size resulted in a HR of 0.475 [95% CI, 0.197-1.141] (p = 0.096). Incidence of different revision procedures did not differ between bearings. Over time the use of CoPE has increased and CoC decreased. CONCLUSIONS: A higher 2-year cup revision rate in press-fit THA was observed in CoC compared to CoPE. Cup loosening was the only significantly different reason for revision and seen more often in CoC and mostly aseptic. Future randomised controlled trials need to confirm causality, since the early cup revision data provided has the potential to be useful when choosing the bearing in press-fit THA, when combined with other factors like bone quality and patient and implant characteristics.

Ceramic-on-ceramic vs ceramic-on-polyethylene, a comparative study with 10-year follow-up.

BACKGROUND: In press-fit total hip arthroplasty (THA) ceramic-on-ceramic (CoC) bearings are a potential for overcoming the wear that is seen in ceramic-on-polyethylene (CoPE) bearings, and can lead to wear-induced osteolysis, resulting in loosening of the implant. However, CoC bearings show disadvantages as well, such as squeaking sounds and being more fragile, which can cause ceramic head or liner fracture. Because comparative long-term studies are limited, the objective of this study was to determine the long-term difference in wear, identify potential predictive factors for wear, investigate radiological findings such as osteolysis, and evaluate clinical functioning and complications between these bearings. AIM: To determine 10-year differences in wear, predictive factors for wear, and investigate radiological findings and clinical functioning between CoC and CoPE. METHODS: This observational prospective single-center cohort study with a 10-year follow-up includes a documented series of elective THAs. Primary outcome was wear measured by anteroposterior (AP) radiographs. Secondary outcomes were potential predictive factors for wear, complications during follow-up, Harris hip score (HHS), and radiological findings such as presence of radiolucency, osteolysis, atrophy, and hypertrophy around the cup. Due to the absence of wear in the CoC group, stratified analysis to identify risk factors for wear was only performed in the CoPE group by use of univariate linear regression analysis. HHS was expressed as a change from baseline and the association with bearing type was assessed by use of multivariate linear regression analysis, adjusted for potential confounders. RESULTS: A total of 17 CoPE (63.0%) and 25 CoC (73.5%) cases were available for follow-up and showed a linear wear of respectively 0.130 mm/year (range 0.010; 0.350) and 0.000 mm/year (range 0.000; 0.005), which was significant (P < 0.001) between both groups. Wear always occurred in the cranial direction. Cup inclination was the only predictive factor for polyethylene (PE) wear. No dislocations, ceramic head, or liner fractures were seen. The HHS showed a mean change from baseline of 37.1 points (SD 18.5) in the CoPE group and 43.9 (SD 17.0) in the CoC group. This crude difference of 6.8 (range -5.2; 18.7) in favor of the CoC group was not significant (P = 0.26) and was not significant when adjusted for age, gender, and diagnosis either (P = 0.99). No significant differences in complications and radiological findings were seen between groups. CONCLUSION: CoC bearing shows lower wear rates compared to CoPE at 10-year follow-up with cup inclination as a predictive factor for wear and no differences in complications, HHS, and radiological findings.

Highly cross-linked versus conventional polyethylene inserts in total hip arthroplasty, a five-year Roentgen stereophotogrammetric analysis randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Polyethylene (PE) particles produced by wear of the acetabular insert are thought to cause osteolysis and thereby aseptic loosening of the implant in total hip arthroplasty (THA). As highly cross-linked polyethylene (HXLPE) is presumed to give lower wear rates, in vivo studies are needed to confirm this. AIM: To compare the wear of REXPOL, a HXPLE, with conventional PE within the first five years after implantation using Roentgen stereophotogrammetric analysis (RSA). METHODS: Patients were randomised to receive either a HXLPE (REXPOL) or a conventional PE insert during primary THA. RSA images were obtained directly postoperative and after 6 wk, 12 wk, 6 mo, 12 mo, 24 mo and five years. Functional outcomes were assessed using the Hip Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score and Harris Hip Score at baseline and five years after surgery. RESULTS: The HXLPE (REXPOL) showed less wear in the latero-medial direction. Significant wear rates of conventional PE were seen in the latero-medial and center-proximal direction and in volume and corrected volume, whereas the REXPOL did not show these outcomes over time. Improvement from baseline in functional outcome did not significantly differ. CONCLUSION: Total 3D wear is less in THAs inserted with a REXPOL inlay than a conventional PE inlay after five years. This study confirms, for the first, that the REXPOL HXLPE inlay is preferred to standard PE.

Diagnosing, planning and evaluating osteochondral ankle defects with imaging modalities.

This current concepts review outlines the role of different imaging modalities in the diagnosis, preoperative planning, and follow-up of osteochondral ankle defects. An osteochondral ankle defect involves the articular cartilage and subchondral bone (usually of the talus) and is mostly caused by an ankle supination trauma. Conventional radiographs are useful as an initial imaging tool in the diagnostic process, but have only moderate sensitivity for the detection of osteochondral defects. Computed tomography (CT) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) are more accurate imaging modalities. Recently, ultrasonography and single photon emission CT have been described for the evaluation of osteochondral talar defects. CT is the most valuable modality for assessing the exact location and size of bony lesions. Cartilage and subchondral bone damage can be visualized using MRI, but the defect size tends to be overestimated due to bone edema. CT with the ankle in full plantar flexion has been shown a reliable tool for preoperative planning of the surgical approach. Postoperative imaging is useful for objective assessment of repair tissue or degenerative changes of the ankle joint. Plain radiography, CT and MRI have been used in outcome studies, and different scoring systems are available.