scholarly journals Ceramic bearings for total hip arthroplasty are associated with a reduced risk of revision for infection

2018 ◽  
Vol 28 (3) ◽  
pp. 222-226 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rami Madanat ◽  
Inari Laaksonen ◽  
Stephen E Graves ◽  
Michelle Lorimer ◽  
Orhun Muratoglu ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Total Hip Arthroplasty ◽  
Hip Arthroplasty ◽  
Lower Risk ◽  
Revision Rate ◽  
Joint Infection ◽  
Bearing Surface ◽  
Related Factors ◽  
Total Hip ◽  
Reduced Risk ◽  
Ceramic On Ceramic

Introduction: Periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) is a serious complication after total hip arthroplasty (THA) and bearing material’s associations to PJI prevalence is largely unknown. The main purposes of this study were to determine if revision for infection varied depending on the type of bearing surface used in primary THA and to study whether patient or implant related factors had an effect on this variation. Methods: A total of 177,237 primary THA procedures from the Australian Registry (AOANJRR) were analysed. 3 bearing surfaces were compared. Metal-on-highly cross-linked polyethylene (MoXP) bearing had been used in 95,129 hips, ceramic-on-highly cross-linked polyethylene (CoXP) in 24,269 hips, and ceramic-on-ceramic (CoC) in 57,839 hips. Revision rates for infection were compared between the 3 groups. Results: Both MoXP and CoXP had a higher revision rate for infection compared to CoC hips (hazard ratio [HR] 1.46 (1.25, 1.72), p < 0.001) and HR 1.42 (1.15, 1.75), p = 0.001 respectively). Patients aged 70 years or less had a lower revision rate for infection when a CoC bearing was used. This difference was independent of sex, and prostheses selection. No difference was evident if the femoral component was cemented or a head size of 28 mm was used. Discussion: In this registry-based material, use of a CoC bearing was associated with a lower risk of revision for infection in patients younger than 70 years when cementless femoral components were used. Further studies are needed to verify this finding.

scholarly journals The influence of bearing surfaces on revisions due to dislocations in total hip arthroplasty

2021 ◽  
Vol 32 (9) ◽  
Author(s):  
Francesco Castagnini ◽  
Barbara Bordini ◽  
Monica Cosentino ◽  
Cristina Ancarani ◽  
Federica Mariotti ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Total Hip Arthroplasty ◽  
Hip Arthroplasty ◽  
Lower Risk ◽  
Time Distribution ◽  
Total Hip ◽  
Arthroplasty Registry ◽  
Metal On Metal ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Frequent Reason ◽  
Ceramic On Ceramic

Abstract Introduction Recurrent dislocations are still the most frequent reason for revision in total hip arthroplasty (THA). The impact of bearing surfaces on dislocations is still controversial. We hypothesized that: (1) bearing surfaces influence the revisions due to dislocations; (2) ceramic-on-ceramic reduced the revisions for dislocations in adjusted models; (3) Delta-on-Delta bearings reduced the revisions for dislocations in comparison to surfaces with cross-linked polyethylene. Materials and methods The regional arthroplasty registry was enquired about bearing surfaces and revisions for dislocations and instability. Unadjusted and adjusted rates were provided, including sex, age (<65 years or ≥65 years), head diameter (≤28 mm or >28 mm; <36 mm or ≥36 mm) as variables. 44,065 THAs were included. Results The rate of revisions for dislocations was significantly lower in ceramic-on-ceramic and metal-on-metal bearings (unadjusted rates). After adjusting for age, sex, and head size (36 and 28 mm), hard-on-hard bearings were protective (p < 0.05): ceramic-on-ceramic had a lower risk of revisions due to dislocation than ceramic-on-polyethylene (HR 1.6, 95% CI 1.2–2.2 p = 0.0009). The rate of revisions for dislocation was similar in bearings with cross-linked polyethylene and Delta-on-Delta articulations, in unadjusted and adjusted models. Conclusion Bearings with conventional polyethylene were more predisposed to dislocations. Currently adopted bearings exerted no significant influence on revisions due to dislocations. These findings could be primarily related to wear, but due to the time distribution, soft tissue envelopes and surface tension may also play a role. Pre-clinical biomechanical evaluations and prospective matched cohort studies are required to draw definitive conclusions.

The effect of bearing surface on risk of periprosthetic joint infection in total hip arthroplasty

2018 ◽  
Vol 100-B (2) ◽  
pp. 134-142 ◽  
Author(s):  
A. T. Hexter ◽  
S. M. Hislop ◽  
G. W. Blunn ◽  
A. D. Liddle
Keyword(s):  
Total Hip Arthroplasty ◽  
Hip Arthroplasty ◽  
Periprosthetic Joint Infection ◽  
Observational Studies ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Joint Infection ◽  
Risk Of Bias ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
Bearing Surface ◽  
Total Hip

Aims Periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) is a serious complication of total hip arthroplasty (THA). Different bearing surface materials have different surface properties and it has been suggested that the choice of bearing surface may influence the risk of PJI after THA. The objective of this meta-analysis was to compare the rate of PJI between metal-on-polyethylene (MoP), ceramic-on-polyethylene (CoP), and ceramic-on-ceramic (CoC) bearings. Patients and Methods Electronic databases (Medline, Embase, Cochrane library, Web of Science, and Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Health Literature) were searched for comparative randomized and observational studies that reported the incidence of PJI for different bearing surfaces. Two investigators independently reviewed studies for eligibility, evaluated risk of bias, and performed data extraction. Meta-analysis was performed using the Mantel–Haenzel method and random-effects model in accordance with methods of the Cochrane group. Results Our search strategy revealed 2272 studies, of which 17 met the inclusion criteria and were analyzed. These comprised 11 randomized controlled trials and six observational studies. The overall quality of included studies was high but the observational studies were at high risk of bias due to inadequate adjustment for confounding factors. The overall cumulative incidence of PJI across all studies was 0.78% (1514/193 378). For each bearing combination, the overall incidence was as follows: MoP 0.85% (1353/158 430); CoP 0.38% (67/17 489); and CoC 0.53% (94/17 459). The meta-analysis showed no significant difference between the three bearing combinations in terms of risk of PJI. Conclusion On the basis of the clinical studies available, there is no evidence that bearing choice influences the risk of PJI. Future research, including basic science studies and large, adequately controlled registry studies, may be helpful in determining whether implant materials play a role in determining the risk of PJI following arthroplasty surgery. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2018;100-B:134–42.

Ceramic-on-ceramic Total Hip Arthroplasty: Incidence and Risk Factors of Bearing Surface–related Noises in 125 Patients

Orthopedics ◽  
2012 ◽  
Vol 35 (11) ◽  
pp. e1581-e1585 ◽  
Author(s):  
Feng-Chih Kuo ◽  
Hao-Chen Liu ◽  
Wun-Schen Chen ◽  
Jun-Wen Wang
Keyword(s):  
Risk Factors ◽  
Total Hip Arthroplasty ◽  
Hip Arthroplasty ◽  
Bearing Surface ◽  
Total Hip ◽  
Ceramic On Ceramic

scholarly journals Ceramic-on-Ceramic Bearing in Total Hip Arthroplasty Reduces the Risk for Revision for Periprosthetic Joint Infection Compared to Ceramic-on-Polyethylene: A Matched Analysis of 118,753 Cementless THA Based on the German Arthroplasty Registry

2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (6) ◽  
pp. 1193
Author(s):  
Lisa Renner ◽  
Carsten Perka ◽  
Oliver Melsheimer ◽  
Alexander Grimberg ◽  
Volkmar Jansson ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Total Hip Arthroplasty ◽  
Hip Arthroplasty ◽  
Periprosthetic Joint Infection ◽  
Science Studies ◽  
Joint Infection ◽  
Total Hip ◽  
Arthroplasty Registry ◽  
Matched Study ◽  
Ceramic On Ceramic

Periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) is one of the most common complications in total hip arthroplasty (THA). The influence of bearing material on the risk of PJI remains unclear to date. This registry-based matched study investigates the role of bearing partners in primary cementless THA. Primary cementless THAs recorded in the German Arthroplasty Registry since 2012 with either a ceramic-on-ceramic (CoC) or ceramic-on-polyethylene (CoP) bearings were included in the analysis. Using propensity score matching (PSM) for age, sex, obesity, diabetes mellitus, Elixhauser comorbidity index, year of surgery and head size, we compared the risk for revision for PJI for CoC and CoP. Within the 115,538 THAs (87.1% CoP; 12.9% CoC), 977 revisions were performed due to PJI. There was a significantly higher risk for revision for PJI for CoP compared with CoC over the whole study period (p < 0.01) after 2:1 matching (CoP:CoC) with a hazard ratio of 1.41 (95% confidence interval (CI), 1.09 to 1.80) After 3 years, the risk for revision for PJI was 0.7% (CI 0.5–0.9%) for CoC and 0.9% (CI 0.8–1.1%) for CoP. The risk for revision for all other reasons except PJI did not significantly differ between the two groups over the whole study period (p = 0.4). Cementless THAs with CoC bearings were less likely to be revised because of infection in mid-term follow-up. In the future, registry-embedded studies focusing on long-term follow-up, including clinical data, as well as basic science studies, may give a deeper insight into the influence of the bearing partners.

Clinical, functional and radiographic outcomes after revision total hip arthroplasty with tapered fluted modular or non-modular stems: a systematic review

2021 ◽  
pp. 112070002110043
Author(s):  
Antonios A Koutalos ◽  
Sokratis Varitimidis ◽  
Konstantinos N Malizos ◽  
Theofilos Karachalios
Keyword(s):  
Total Hip Arthroplasty ◽  
Hip Arthroplasty ◽  
Revision Rate ◽  
Clinical Results ◽  
Fracture Rate ◽  
Revision Total Hip Arthroplasty ◽  
Term Survival ◽  
Total Hip ◽  
Radiographic Outcomes

Purpose: The aim of the study was to systematically evaluate clinical outcomes of tapered fluted stems, either monoblock or modular, in revision total hip arthroplasty. Methods: PubMed, EMBASE and Web of Science and Cochrane databases were systematically searched by 2 researchers. Clinical studies reporting primarily on survival and re-revision rates, and secondarily on subsidence, dislocation, intraoperative fractures, periprosthetic fractures and infection were included. 2 investigators assessed the quality of the studies. Results: 46 studies were included in this review, reporting on 4601 stem revisions. The pooled re-revision rate was 5.1% and long-term survival ranged from 75% to 98.5%. No differences were observed between monoblock and modular stems regarding re-revision rate, dislocation rate, periprosthetic fracture rate or infection rates. Monoblock stems exhibited more subsidence and modular stems displayed more intraoperative fractures. Conclusions: Satisfactory results can be obtained with the use of tapered fluted end-bearing stems. Monoblock stems offer the same clinical results as modular stems.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document