Top

Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research®

Published in:

01-11-2012 | Symposium: Papers Presented at the 2011 Meeting of the International Hip Society

Alumina Heads Minimize Wear and Femoral Osteolysis Progression After Isolated Simple Acetabular Revision

Authors: Philippe Hernigou, MD, Nicolas Dupuy, MD, Olivier Pidet, MD, Yashuhiro Homma, MD, Charles Henri Flouzat Lachaniette, MD

Published in: Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research® | Issue 11/2012

Abstract

Background

Patients with THA requiring cup revision for acetabular osteolysis may have a stable stem component without loosening. However, it is unclear whether isolated cup revision halts femoral osteolysis progression.

Question/purposes

We asked (1) whether and to what degree osteolysis progresses after isolated acetabular revision with a change of the femoral head and (2) whether an alumina or metal bearing better reduces osteolysis progression and wear with a polyethylene (PE) cup.

Methods

We retrospectively evaluated 150 patients who underwent 165 acetabular revisions but no treatment for proximal femoral osteolysis in hips with stable femoral components. Mean age at revision was 63 years (range, 48–74 years). All hips received a new PE cup; 83 hips received new alumina heads and 82 new metal heads. Radiographs (mean followup, 15 years; range, 10–25 years) were assessed to measure osteolysis, loosening, and PE wear. Revisions of the femoral stem were recorded.

Results

An isolated cup revision with a change of the femoral head halted femoral osteolysis progression for 10 years in 133 hips (81%), with a greater percentage without progression in hips with alumina heads (99% versus 62% with metal head). Alumina heads were better than metal heads at reducing the area of osteolysis progression (47 versus 250 mm²) and wear (0.07 versus 0.14 mm/year) and increasing the survival probability before femoral revision (98% versus 85% at 15 years’ followup).

Conclusions

An isolated cup revision with a new alumina femoral head (in hips that have a stable stem component without loosening) usually halts femoral osteolysis progression (no change or osseous restoration) over 10 years if the osteolysis is less than 1000 mm².

Level of Evidence

Level III, therapeutic study. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Allain J, Roudot-Thoraval F, Delecrin J, Anract P, Migaud H, Goutallier D. Revision total hip arthroplasty performed after fracture of a ceramic femoral head: a multicenter survivorship study. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2003;85:825–830.PubMed

Bohm P, Bischel O. Femoral revision with the Wagner SL revision stem: evaluation of one hundred and twenty-nine revisions followed for a mean of 4.8 years. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2001;83:1023–1031.PubMedCrossRef

Bozic KJ, Kurtz SM, Lau E, Ong K, Vail TP, Berry DJ. The epidemiology of revision total hip arthroplasty in the United States. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2009;91:128–133.PubMedCrossRef

Chen XD, Waddell JP, Morton J, Schemitsch EH. Isolated acetabular revision after total hip arthroplasty: results at 5–9 years of follow-up. Int Orthop. 2005;29:277–280.PubMedCrossRef

DeLee JG, Charnley J. Radiological demarcation of cemented sockets in total hip replacement. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1976;121:20–32.PubMed

Gozzard C, Blom A, Taylor A, Smith E, Learmonth I. A comparison of the reliability and validity of bone stock loss and classification systems used for revision hip surgery. J Arthroplasty. 2003;18:638–642.PubMedCrossRef

Hannouche D, Delambre J, Zadegan F, Sedel L, Nizard R. Is there a risk in placing a ceramic head on a previously implanted trunion? Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2010;468:3322–3327.PubMedCrossRef

Hernigou P, Bahramy T. Zirconia and alumina ceramics in comparison with metal heads: polyethylene wear after a minimum ten year follow-up. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2003;85:504–509.PubMedCrossRef

Hernigou P, Intrator L, Bahrami T, Bensoussan A, Farcet JP. Interleukin 6 in the blood of patients with total hip arthroplasty without loosening. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1999;366:147–154.PubMedCrossRef

10.

Hernigou P, Zilber S, Filippini P, Poignard A. Ceramic-ceramic bearing decreases osteolysis: a 20-year study versus ceramic-polyethylene on the contralateral hip. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2009;467:2274–2280.PubMedCrossRef

11.

International Organization for Standardization. ISO 5832-9: Implants for Surgery—Metallic Materials—Part 9: Wrought High Nitrogen Stainless Steel. Geneva, Switzerland: International Organization for Standardization; 2007.

12.

Lawless BM, Healy WL, Sharma S, Iorio R. Outcomes of isolated acetabular revision. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2010;468:472–479.PubMedCrossRef

13.

Lieberman JR, Moeckel BH, Evans BG, Salvati EA, Ranawat CS. Cement-within-cement revision hip arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1993;75:869–871.PubMed

14.

Manning DW, Ponce BA, Chiang PP, Harris WH, Burke DW. Isolated acetabular revision through the posterior approach: short-term results after revision of a recalled acetabular component. J Arthroplasty. 2005;20:723–729.PubMedCrossRef

15.

Paprosky WG, Perona PG, Lawrence JM. Acetabular defect classification and surgical reconstruction in revision arthroplasty: a 6-year follow-up evaluation. J Arthroplasty. 1994;9:33–44.PubMedCrossRef

16.

Pospischill M, Knahr K. Strategies for head and inlay exchange in revision hip arthroplasty. Int Orthop. 2011;35:261–265.PubMedCrossRef

17.

Pulliam IT, Trousdale RT. Fracture of a ceramic femoral head after a revision operation: a case report. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1997;79:118–121.PubMed

18.

Saito M, Saito S, Ohzono K, Takaoka K, Ono K. Efficacy of alumina ceramic heads for cemented total hip arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1992;283:171–177.PubMed

19.

Schuller HM, Marti RK. Ten-year socket wear in 66 hip arthroplasties: ceramic versus metal heads. Acta Orthop Scand. 1990;61:240–243.PubMedCrossRef

20.

Smith LK, Cramp F, Palmer S, Coghill N, Spencer RF. Use of morphometry to quantify osteolysis after total hip arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2010;468:3077–3083.PubMedCrossRef

21.

Sugano N, Nishii T, Nakata K, Masuhara K, Takaoka K. Polyethylene sockets and alumina ceramic heads in cemented total hip arthroplasty: a ten-year study. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1995;77:548–556.PubMed

22.

Wroblewski BM, Siney PD, Dowson D, Collins SN. Prospective clinical and joint simulator studies of a new total hip arthroplasty using alumina ceramic heads and cross-linked polyethylene cups. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1996;78:280–285.PubMed

Title: Alumina Heads Minimize Wear and Femoral Osteolysis Progression After Isolated Simple Acetabular Revision
Authors: Philippe Hernigou, MD
Nicolas Dupuy, MD
Olivier Pidet, MD
Yashuhiro Homma, MD
Charles Henri Flouzat Lachaniette, MD
Publication date: 01-11-2012
Publisher: Springer-Verlag
Published in: Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research® / Issue 11/2012
Print ISSN: 0009-921X
Electronic ISSN: 1528-1132
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11999-012-2363-y

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

Alumina Heads Minimize Wear and Femoral Osteolysis Progression After Isolated Simple Acetabular Revision

Abstract

Background

Question/purposes

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Level of Evidence

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Background

Question/purposes

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Level of Evidence

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 11/2012

Cementing Acetabular Liners Into Secure Cementless Shells for Polyethylene Wear Provides Durable Mid-term Fixation

Do Joint Registries Report True Rates of Hip Dislocation?

Is a Cementless Dual Mobility Socket in Primary THA a Reasonable Option?

Does Bone Wax Induce a Chronic Inflammatory Articular Reaction?

Does Orthopaedic Surgical Training Induce Hypertension? A Pilot Study

Does CT-Based Navigation Improve the Long-Term Survival in Ceramic-on-Ceramic THA?