Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

At a glance: The STEP trials

A round-up of the STEP phase 3 clinical trials evaluating semaglutide for weight loss in people with overweight or obesity.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research®
Published in: Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research® 2/2014

01-02-2014 | Symposium: 2013 Hip Society Proceedings

Stability and Trunnion Wear Potential in Large-diameter Metal-on-Metal Total Hips: A Finite Element Analysis

Authors: Jacob M. Elkins, MD, PhD, John J. Callaghan, MD, Thomas D. Brown, PhD

Published in: Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research® | Issue 2/2014

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

Large-diameter femoral heads for metal-on-metal THA hold theoretical advantages of joint stability and low bearing surface wear. However, recent reports have indicated an unacceptably high rate of wear-associated failure with large-diameter bearings, possibly due in part to increased wear at the trunnion interface. Thus, the deleterious consequences of using large heads may outweigh their theoretical advantages.

Questions/purposes

We investigated (1) to what extent femoral head size influenced stability in THA for several dislocation-prone motions; and the biomechanics of wear at the trunnion interface by considering the relationship between (2) wear potential and head size and (3) wear potential and other factors, including cup orientation, type of hip motion, and assembly/impaction load.

Methods

Computational simulations were executed using a previously validated nonlinear contact finite element model. Stability was determined at 36 cup orientations for five distinct dislocation challenges. Wear at the trunnion interface was calculated for three separate cup orientations subjected to gait, stooping, and sit-to-stand motions. Seven head diameters were investigated: 32 to 56 mm, in 4-mm increments.

Results

Stability improved with increased diameter, although diminishing benefit was seen for sizes of greater than 40 mm. By contrast, contact stress and computed wear at the trunnion interface all increased unabatedly with increasing head size. Increased impaction forces resulted in only small decreases in trunnion wear generation.

Conclusions

These data suggest that the theoretical advantages of large-diameter femoral heads have a limit. Diameters of greater than 40 mm demonstrated only modest improvement in terms of joint stability yet incurred substantial increase in wear potential at the trunnion.

Clinical Relevance

Our model has potential to help investigators and designers of hip implants to better understand the optimization of trunnion design for long-term durability.
Literature
1.
Archard J. Contact and rubbing of flat surfaces. J Appl Phys. 1953;24:981–988.CrossRef
2.
3.
Bartz RL, Noble PC, Kadakia NR, Tullos HS. The effect of femoral component head size on posterior dislocation of the artificial hip joint. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2000;82:1300–1307.PubMed
4.
Berton C, Girard J, Krantz N, Migaud H. The Durom large diameter head acetabular component: early results with a large-diameter metal-on-metal bearing. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2010;92:202–208.PubMedCrossRef
5.
Bolland B, Culliford D, Langton D, Millington J, Arden N, Latham J. High failure rates with a large-diameter hybrid metal-on-metal total hip replacement: clinical, radiological and retrieval analysis. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2011;93:608–615.PubMedCrossRef
6.
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
7.
Brockett C, Williams S, Jin Z, Isaac G, Fisher J. Friction of total hip replacements with different bearings and loading conditions. J Biomed Mater Res B Appl Biomater. 2007;81:508–515.PubMedCrossRef
8.
Brown S, Flemming C, Kawalec J, Placko H, Vassaux C, Merritt K, Payer J, Kraay M. Fretting corrosion accelerates crevice corrosion of modular hip tapers. J Appl Biomater. 1995;6:19–26.PubMedCrossRef
9.
Browne JA, Bechtold CD, Berry DJ, Hanssen AD, Lewallen DG. Failed metal-on-metal hip arthroplasties: a spectrum of clinical presentations and operative findings. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2010;468:2313–2320.PubMedCrossRef
10.
Burroughs BR, Hallstrom B, Golladay GJ, Hoeffel D, Harris WH. Range of motion and stability in total hip arthroplasty with 28-, 32-, 38-, and 44-mm femoral head sizes: an in vitro study. J Arthroplasty. 2005;20:11–19.PubMedCrossRef
11.
Cinotti G, Lucioli N, Malagoli A, Calderoli C, Cassese F. Do large femoral heads reduce the risks of impingement in total hip arthroplasty with optimal and non-optimal cup positioning? Int Orthop. 2011;3:317–323.CrossRef
12.
Collier JP, Mayor MB, Williams IR, Surprenant VA, Surprenant HP, Currier BH. The tradeoffs associated with modular hip prostheses. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1995;311:91–101.PubMed
13.
Cook SD, Barrack RL, Clemow A. Corrosion and wear at the modular interface of uncemented femoral stems. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1994;76:68–72.PubMed
14.
Crowninshield RD, Maloney WJ, Wentz DH, Humphrey SM, Blanchard CR. Biomechanics of large femoral heads: what they do and don’t do. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2004;429:102–107.PubMedCrossRef
15.
Cuckler JM, Moore KD, Lombardi AV, McPherson E, Emerson R. Large versus small femoral heads in metal-on-metal total hip arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty. 2004;19:41–44.PubMedCrossRef
16.
De Haan R, Pattyn C, Gill HS, Murray DW, Campbell PA, De Smet K. Correlation between inclination of the acetabular component and metal ion levels in metal-on-metal hip resurfacing replacement. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2008;90:1291–1297.PubMedCrossRef
17.
D’Lima DD, Urquhart AG, Buehler KO, Walker RH, Colwell CW. The effect of the orientation of the acetabular and femoral components on the range of motion of the hip at different head-neck ratios. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2000;82:315–321.PubMed
18.
19.
Donell S, Darrah C, Nolan J, Wimhurst J, Toms A, Barker T, Case C, Tucker J. Early failure of the Ultima metal-on-metal total hip replacement in the presence of normal plain radiographs. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2010;92:1501–1508.PubMedCrossRef
20.
Dorr LD, Wolf AW, Chandler R, Conaty JP. Classification and treatment of dislocations of total hip arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1983;173:151–158.PubMed
21.
Dowson D, Hardaker C, Flett M, Isaac GH. A hip joint simulator study of the performance of metal-on-metal joints. Part II: Design. J Arthroplasty. 2004;19:124–130.
22.
Elias JJ, Nagao M, Chu YH, Carbone JJ, Lennox DW, Chao E. Medial cortex strain distribution during noncemented total hip arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2000;370:250–258.PubMedCrossRef
23.
Elkins JM, Kruger KM, Pedersen DR, Callaghan JJ, Brown TD. Edge-loading severity as a function of cup lip radius in metal-on-metal total hips—a finite element analysis. J Orthop Res. 2012;30:169–177.PubMedCrossRef
24.
Elkins JM, O’Brien MK, Stroud NJ, Pedersen DR, Callaghan JJ, Brown TD. Hard-on-hard total hip impingement causes extreme contact stress concentrations. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2011;469:454–463.PubMedCrossRef
25.
Elkins JM, Stroud NJ, Rudert MJ, Tochigi Y, Pedersen DR, Ellis BJ, Callaghan JJ, Weiss JA, Brown TD. The capsule’s contribution to total hip construct stability—a finite element analysis. J Orthop Res. 2011;29:1642–1648.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef
26.
Fessler H, Fricker D. Friction in femoral prosthesis and photoelastic model cone taper joints. Proc Inst Mech Eng H. 1989;203:1–14.PubMedCrossRef
27.
Fisher J. Bioengineering reasons for the failure of metal-on-metal hip prostheses: an engineer’s perspective. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2011;93:1001–1004.PubMedCrossRef
28.
Garbuz DS, Tanzer M, Greidanus NV, Masri BA, Duncan CP. The John Charnley Award. Metal-on-metal hip resurfacing versus large-diameter head metal-on-metal total hip arthroplasty: a randomized clinical trial. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2010;468:318–325.PubMedCrossRef
29.
Gilbert JL, Buckley CA, Jacobs JJ. In vivo corrosion of modular hip prosthesis components in mixed and similar metal combinations: the effect of crevice, stress, motion, and alloy coupling. J Biomed Mater Res. 1993;27:1533–1544.PubMedCrossRef
30.
Girard J, Bocquet D, Autissier G, Fouilleron N, Fron D, Migaud H. Metal-on-metal hip arthroplasty in patients thirty years of age or younger. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2010;92:2419–2426.PubMedCrossRef
31.
Goldberg JR, Gilbert JL. In vitro corrosion testing of modular hip tapers. J Biomed Mater Res B Appl Biomater. 2003;64:78–93.PubMedCrossRef
32.
Goldberg JR, Gilbert JL, Jacobs JJ, Bauer TW, Paprosky W, Leurgans S. A multicenter retrieval study of the taper interfaces of modular hip prostheses. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2002;401:149–161.PubMedCrossRef
33.
Heiney JP, Battula S, Vrabec GA, Parikh A, Blice R, Schoenfeld AJ, Njus GO. Impact magnitudes applied by surgeons and their importance when applying the femoral head onto the Morse taper for total hip arthroplasty. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 2009;129:793–796.PubMedCrossRef
34.
Insall JN. Presidential address to The Knee Society: choices and compromises in total knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1988;226:43–48.PubMed
35.
Jacobs JJ, Gilbert JL, Urban RM. Current concepts review: corrosion of metal orthopaedic implants. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1998;80:268–282.PubMed
36.
Khan M, Kuiper JH, Richardson J. The exercise-related rise in plasma cobalt levels after metal-on-metal hip resurfacing arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2008;90:1152–1157.PubMedCrossRef
37.
Kop AM, Swarts E. Corrosion of a hip stem with a modular neck taper junction: a retrieval study of 16 cases. J Arthroplasty. 2009;24:1019–1023.PubMedCrossRef
38.
Langton D, Jameson S, Joyce T, Gandhi J, Sidaginamale R, Mereddy P, Lord J, Nargol A. Accelerating failure rate of the ASR total hip replacement. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2011;93:1011–1016.PubMedCrossRef
39.
Langton D, Jameson S, Joyce T, Hallab N, Natu S, Nargol A. Early failure of metal-on-metal bearings in hip resurfacing and large-diameter total hip replacement: a consequence of excess wear. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2010;92:38–46.PubMedCrossRef
40.
Leslie IJ, Williams S, Isaac G, Ingham E, Fisher J. High cup angle and microseparation increase the wear of hip surface replacements. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2009;467:2259–2265.PubMedCrossRef
41.
Liu F, Leslie I, Williams S, Fisher J, Jin Z. Development of computational wear simulation of metal-on-metal hip resurfacing replacements. J Biomech. 2008;41:686–694.PubMedCrossRef
42.
Lombardi AV, Skeels MD, Berend KR, Adams JB, Franchi OJ. Do large heads enhance stability and restore native anatomy in primary total hip arthroplasty? Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2011;469:1547–1553.PubMedCrossRef
43.
Mao X, Tay GH, Godbolt DB, Crawford RW. Pseudotumor in a well-fixed metal-on-polyethylene uncemented hip arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty. 2012;27:493e13–493e16.CrossRef
44.
McKellop HA, Sarmiento A, Brien W, Park SH. Interface corrosion of a modular head total hip prosthesis. J Arthroplasty. 1992;7:291–294.PubMedCrossRef
45.
Morlock M, Schneider E, Bluhm A, Vollmer M, Bergmann G, Muller V, Honl M. Duration and frequency of everyday activities in total hip patients. J Biomech. 2001;34:873–881.PubMedCrossRef
46.
Murray D. The definition and measurement of acetabular orientation. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1993;75:228–232.PubMed
47.
Nadzadi ME, Pedersen DR, Yack HJ, Callaghan JJ, Brown TD. Kinematics, kinetics, and finite element analysis of commonplace maneuvers at risk for total hip dislocation. J Biomech. 2003;36:577–591.PubMedCrossRef
48.
Pandit H, Glyn-Jones S, McLardy-Smith P, Gundle R, Whitwell D, Gibbons CL, Ostlere S, Athanasou N, Gill HS, Murray DW. Pseudotumours associated with metal-on-metal hip resurfacings. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2008;90:847–851.PubMedCrossRef
49.
Peters CL, McPherson E, Jackson JD, Erickson JA. Reduction in early dislocation rate with large-diameter femoral heads in primary total hip arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty. 2007;22:140–144.PubMedCrossRef
50.
Sanders AP, Brannon RM. Assessment of the applicability of the Hertzian contact theory to edge-loaded prosthetic hip bearings. J Biomech. 2011;44:2802–2808.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef
51.
Scifert CF, Brown TD, Pedersen DR, Callaghan JJ. A finite element analysis of factors influencing total hip dislocation. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1998;355:152–162.PubMedCrossRef
52.
Silva M, Heisel C, Schmalzried TP. Metal-on-metal total hip replacement. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2005;430:53–61.PubMedCrossRef
53.
Stuchin SA. Anatomic diameter femoral heads in total hip arthroplasty: a preliminary report. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2008;90(suppl 3):52–56.PubMedCrossRef
54.
Svensson O, Mathiesen EB, Reinholt F, Blomgren G. Formation of a fulminant soft-tissue pseudotumor after uncemented hip arthroplasty: a case report. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1988;70:1238–1242.PubMed
55.
Walsh AJ, Nikolaou VS, Antoniou J. Inflammatory pseudotumor complicating metal-on-highly cross-linked polyethylene total hip arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty. 2012;27:324.e5–324.e8.
56.
Willert HG, Buchhorn GH, Fayyazi A, Flury R, Windler M, Koster G, Lohmann CH. Metal-on-metal bearings and hypersensitivity in patients with artificial hip joints: a clinical and histomorphological study. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2005;87:28–36.PubMedCrossRef
57.
Williams S, Leslie I, Isaac G, Jin Z, Ingham E, Fisher J. Tribology and wear of metal-on-metal hip prostheses: influence of cup angle and head position. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2008;90:111–117.PubMedCrossRef
58.
Zywiel MG, Sayeed SA, Johnson AJ, Schmalzried TP, Mont MA. Survival of hard-on-hard bearings in total hip arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2011;469:1536–1546.PubMedCrossRef
Metadata
Title
Stability and Trunnion Wear Potential in Large-diameter Metal-on-Metal Total Hips: A Finite Element Analysis
Authors
Jacob M. Elkins, MD, PhD
John J. Callaghan, MD
Thomas D. Brown, PhD
Publication date
01-02-2014
Publisher
Springer US
Published in
Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research® / Issue 2/2014
Print ISSN: 0009-921X
Electronic ISSN: 1528-1132
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11999-013-3244-8

Other articles of this Issue 2/2014

Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research® 2/2014 Go to the issue

Symposium: 2013 Hip Society Proceedings

Surgical Technique: Gluteus Maximus and Tensor Fascia Lata Transfer for Primary Deficiency of the Abductors of the Hip

Symposium: 2013 Hip Society Proceedings

Elevation of Serum Tumor Necrosis Factor α in Patients with Periprosthetic Osteolysis: A Case-Control Study

Obituary

Obituary: Cyril Jacob Kaplan, MD, MBChB(Cape), MChOrth(Liv), FRCS(Eng), FACS (1917–2012)

Editor's Spotlight/Take 5

Editor’s Spotlight/Take 5: Osteogenic Gene Expression Correlates With Development of Heterotopic Ossification in War Wounds

CORR Curriculum — Orthopaedic Education

Orthopaedic Surgery Education in India

CORR Insights

CORR Insights®: Coexisting Lumbar Spondylosis in Patients Undergoing TKA: How Common and How Serious?