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.

Comparison of Ceramic-on-Ceramic vs. Ceramic-on-Polyethylene for Primary Total Hip Arthroplasty: A Meta-Analysis of 15 Randomized Trials

Objective: This meta-analysis aimed to compare ceramic-on-ceramic (COC) components and ceramic-on-polyethylene (COP) components during total hip arthroplasty (THA).Settings: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing COC and COP during primary THA was conducted. Electronic searches were current to March 2021.Participants: Trials were included for meta-analysis if they compared at least the bearing surfaces of COC and COP for patients undergoing primary THA and if they reported the outcomes of THA after a certain period of follow-up and only RCTs in English were included.Primary and Secondary Outcome Measures: The primary endpoints consist of audible noise, prosthesis fracture, and revision. Secondary endpoints include dislocation, deep infection, osteolysis, and prosthesis loosening. Extracted data were statistically analyzed with the Stata11.0.Results: A total of 15 RCTs containing 2,702 patients (2,813 hips) were included in this study. The audible noise [odds ratio (OR) = 5.919; 95% CI: 2.043, 17.146; p ≤ 0.001] and prosthesis fracture (OR = 35.768; 95% CI: 8.957, 142.836; p = 0.001) were significantly higher in the COC group. Hip function, revision rate, dislocation rate, deep infection rate, osteolysis rate, and prosthesis loosening rate were comparable between these two groups, while the wear rate was higher in the COP group.Conclusion: This study indicated comparable outcomes of COC and COP bearing surfaces in primary THA; high-quality RCTs with a long-term follow-up are still urgently needed to provide more evidence on the optimal bearing surfaces in primary THA.

Outcomes of Ceramic Composite in Total Hip Replacement Bearings: A Single-Center Series

Despite the fact that total hip replacement is one of the most successful surgical procedures for treatment of a variety of end-stage hip diseases, the process of osteolysis and implant loosening remains a significant problem, especially in young and high-demand patients. More than 40 years ago, ceramic bearings were introduced due to their mechanical advantage in order to obtain a reduction in wear debris, and due to the conviction that it was possible to minimize friction and wear owing to their mechanical hardness, high chemical stability, surface lubrication by fluids and low friction coefficient. Together with excellent mechanical properties, ceramics have a biological inertness: eventual ceramic debris will lead to a reactive response with a high predominance of fibrocystic cells, rather than macrophagic cells, and absence of giant cells, which is ideal from a biological perspective. As a consequence, they will not trigger the granulomatous reaction necessary to induce periprosthetic osteolysis, and this clearly appears to be of great clinical relevance. In recent years, tribology in manufacturing ceramic components has progressed with significant improvements, owing to the development of the latest generation of ceramic composites that allow for an increased material density and reduced grain size. Currently, ceramic-on-ceramic bearings are considered the attractive counterparts of ceramic- or metal-on-polyethylene ones for patients with a long life expectancy. The aim of this paper is to report the results of total hip replacements performed with a ceramic-on-ceramic articulation made from a ceramic composite in a single center, focusing on its usefulness in specific preoperative diagnosis.

Ten-year survival of ceramic-on-ceramic total hip arthroplasty in patients younger than 60 years: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background Total hip arthroplasty (THA) with ceramic-on-ceramic (CoC) was created to minimise wear debris and aseptic loosening. A decade ago, a meta-analysis showed a 10-year survival rate of just 89%. Based on the excellent tribology of the current CoC, significant improvement of implant survivorship is expected. In patients younger than 60, we conducted a meta-analysis to assess 10-year survival and complications after using current primary CoC THA. Materials and methods PubMed, Scopus, EMBASE, Virtual Health Library, and Cochrane Library were used to scan for published trials that met the inclusion criteria until January 2019. The qualified studies were subjected to a systematic review and proportional analysis, and the randomised controlled trials (RCTs) were included in a comparison meta-analysis. Results Thirteen studies were included 156 findings. The total number of hips was 2278. Nine studies were cohort, and four were RCTs between ceramic and polyethylene cups. The analysis revealed an average age of 44 years (range 24–54). The 10-year survival 96% (95% CI; 95.4–96.8%), aseptic loosening rate 0.516. (95% CI; 0.265–0.903), ceramic fracture rate 0.620 (95% CI; 0.34–1.034) and squeaking rate 2.687 (95% CI; 1.279–4.593). A comparison meta-analysis revealed the risk ratio (RR) for revision was 0.27 (95% CI; 0.15–0.47), and for aseptic loosening 0.15 (0.03–0.70) favouring CoC, while RR for component fracture was 1.62 (95% CI; 0.27–9.66) favouring the polyethylene. Conclusion In patients under sixty, current CoC THAs are correlated with better 10-year outcomes than before and have high survivorship rates. Level of evidence: Level I.

Cementless Ceramic-on-Ceramic Total Hip Replacement in Children and Adolescents

Background: total hip replacement (THR) is a rare surgical option in children and adolescents with disabling hip diseases. The aim of this study is to report results from a retrospective cohort of patients aged 18 years or less who underwent cementless Ceramic-on-Ceramic (CoC) THR at a single institution, investigating clinical and radiographic outcomes, survival rates, and reasons for revision of the implants. Materials and methods: we queried the Registry of Prosthetic Orthopedic Implants (RIPO) to identify all children and adolescents undergoing THR between 2000 and 2019 at a single Institution. Inclusion criteria were patients undergoing cementless CoC THR, aged less than 18 years at surgery, followed for at least 2 years. Sixty-eight patients (74 hips) matched all the inclusion criteria and were enrolled in the study. We assessed the clinical and radiographic outcomes, the rate of complications, the survival rate, and reasons for revision of the implants. Results: The mean follow-up was 6.6 ± 4.4 years (range 2–20). The most frequent reason for THR was post-traumatic or chemotherapy-induced avascular necrosis (38%). The overall survival rate of the cohort was 97.6% (95% CI: 84.9–99.7%) at 5 years of follow-up, 94.4% (95% CI: 79.8–98.6%) at 10 years and 15 years of follow-up. Two THR in two patients (2.7%) required revision. With the numbers available, Cox regression analysis could not detect any significant interaction between preoperative or intraoperative variables and implant survivorship (p-value 0.242 to 0.989).” The average HOOS was 85 ± 14.3 (range 30.6–100). Overall, 23 patients (48%) reported excellent HOOS scores (>90 points), 21 patients (44%) reported acceptable HOOS scores (60–90 points) while 4 patients (8%) reported poor outcomes (<60 points). Twenty-one patients (43%) were regularly involved into moderate- to high-intensity sport activities (UCLA ≥ 6). Conclusions: Cementless CoC THR is a successful procedure in children and teenagers, having demonstrated high implant survivorship and low rates of complications and failure. A meticulous preoperative planning and implant selection is mandatory, to avoid implant malposition, which is the main reason of failure and revision in these cases. Further studies are needed to assess the impact of the THR on the psychosocial wellbeing of teenagers, as well as risks and benefits and cost-effectiveness in comparison to the hip preserving surgical procedures.

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

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.