Method of Characterizing Fretting and Corrosion at the Various Taper Connections of Retrieved Modular Components from Metal-on-Metal Total Hip Arthroplasty

Author(s):  
Genymphas B. Higgs ◽  
Josa A. Hanzlik ◽  
Daniel W. MacDonald ◽  
William M. Kane ◽  
Judd S. Day ◽  
...  
2021 ◽  
Vol 9 ◽  
pp. 205031212110147
Author(s):  
Nobuhiko Sumiyoshi ◽  
Kazuhiro Oinuma ◽  
Yoko Miura

Background: Adverse reactions to metal debris are significant complications after metal-on-metal total hip arthroplasty. Recently, late appearances of adverse reactions to metal debris and subsequent need for reoperations have been reported with small-diameter head metal-on-metal devices. We retrospectively investigated mid-term clinical outcomes of small-head metal-on-metal total hip arthroplasty. Methods: We reviewed 159 hips in 139 patients who had a small-head metal-on-metal total hip arthroplasty (M2a Taper; Biomet, Warsaw, IN) with a minimum 5-year follow-up and documented postoperative complications. Results: Focal osteolysis in either the femur or acetabulum was observed in 12 hips (7.5%, 44 months after surgery on average), with pseudotumor observed in 8 hips (5%, 120 months after surgery on average). Four hips (2.5%) had dislocations (84 months after surgery on average) and six hips (3.8%, 122 months after surgery on average) underwent reoperation. Conclusion: Small-head metal-on-metal total hip arthroplasty is associated with a high degree of complications at mid-term follow-up period. Considering this, we discourage the use of metal-on-metal total hip arthroplasty regardless of head size.


2018 ◽  
Vol 4 (3) ◽  
pp. 291-294
Author(s):  
Masahiro Hasegawa ◽  
Hiroki Wakabayashi ◽  
Akihiro Sudo

2014 ◽  
Vol 85 (4) ◽  
pp. 355-362 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mette Holm Hjorth ◽  
Kjeld Søballe ◽  
Stig Storgaard Jakobsen ◽  
Nina Dyrberg Lorenzen ◽  
Inger Mechlenburg ◽  
...  

Author(s):  
Francesco Castagnini ◽  
Barbara Bordini ◽  
Monica Cosentino ◽  
Cristina Ancarani ◽  
Federica Mariotti ◽  
...  

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.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document