Cementless Total Hip Arthroplasty with Fourth Generation Ceramic-on-Ceramic Articulation: Minimum Two Years of Follow-up

Jin Hak Kim; Song Lee; Jong Hwa Yang; Dae Geun Kim; Bong Soo Seo

doi:10.5371/hp.2012.24.3.194

Journal List > Hip Pelvis > v.24(3) > 1081939

Go to TopGo to Top Go to BottomGo to Bottom

TOOLS

Kim, Lee, Yang, Kim, and Seo: Cementless Total Hip Arthroplasty with Fourth Generation Ceramic-on-Ceramic Articulation: Minimum Two Years of Follow-up

Original Article

Hip & Pelvis

Hip & Pelvis 2012; 24(3): 194-199.

Published online: 30 September 2012

DOI: https://doi.org/10.5371/hp.2012.24.3.194

Cementless Total Hip Arthroplasty with Fourth Generation Ceramic-on-Ceramic Articulation: Minimum Two Years of Follow-up

Jin Hak Kim, MD, Song Lee, MD, Jong Hwa Yang, MD, Dae Geun Kim, MD, Bong Soo Seo, MD

Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Seoul Sacred Heart General Hospital, Seoul, Korea.

Address reprint request to Jin Hak Kim, MD. Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Seoul Sacred Heart General Hospital, 40-12 Cheongnyangni-dong, Dongdaemun-gu, Seoul, 130-867 Korea. TEL: +82-2-966-1616, FAX: +82-2-968-2394, anectto@naver.com

Received 13 March 2012 Revised 19 September 2012 Accepted 21 September 2012

(open-access):

This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Abstract

Purpose

The purpose of this study is to report clinical and radiographic results over a period of two 2 years after cementless total hip arthroplasty (THA) with fourth generation ceramic-on-ceramic articulation.

Materials and Methods

We studied 22 patients, 23 cases which were followed up for two years among 25 patients, 26 patients who underwent cementless THA with the fourth generation ceramic between April 2009 and December 2009. The average age of the patients was 55.9 years old(22 to 72 years old), and the average follow-up duration was 28 months(24 to 32 months). A clinical evaluation was performed using the Harris hip score (HHS), and radiologic evaluation was based on acetabular cups and osteolysis of the femoral stems, instability, distance, angle, and so on.

Results

HHS showed an increase, from 54 for before-surgical treatment, to 91 at the last follow-up. Inguinal pain was observed in one case, and femoral pain was observed in two cases. Stable fixation was achieved in all cases, and no instability, osteolysis, or movement of acetabular cups and femoral stems was observed.

Conclusion

Clinical and radiological short-term results for use ofthe fourth generation ceramic-on-ceramic cementless THA have favorable so far. Further follow-up study should be performed for evaluation of the long-term results.

Keywords: Hip, Total hip arthroplasty (THA), Ceramic-on-ceramic articulation, The fourth generation

Figures and Tables

Fig. 1

Anteroposterior radiograph of 41-year old male patient. (A) Preoperative radiographs shows that the left hip secondary osteoarthritis due to LCP sequela. (B) radiographs shows post-operation. (C) Twenty five months after operation, the follow-up radiograph shows that there is no osteolysis and wear of acetabularand femoral component. The patient's clinical score is excellent.

Fig. 2

References

1. Harris WH. Wear and periprosthetic osteolysis: the problem. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2001. (393):66–70.

2. Christel PS. Biocompatibility of surgical-grade dense polycrystalline alumina. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1992. (282):10–18.

3. Sedel L. Evolution of alumina-on-alumina implants: a review. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2000. (379):48–54.

4. Muratoglu OK, Bragdon CR, O'Connor DO, Jasty M, Harris WH. A novel method of cross-linking ultra-high-molecular-weight polyethylene to improve wear, reduce oxidation, and retain mechanical properties. Recipient of the 1999 HAP Paul Award. J Arthroplasty. 2001. 16:149–160.

5. Mahoney OM, Dimon JH 3rd. Unsatisfactory results with a ceramic total hip prosthesis. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1990. 72:663–671.

6. Barrack RL, Burak C, Skinner HB. Concerns about ceramics in THA. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2004. (429):73–79.

7. Walter WL, O'Toole GC, Walter WK, Ellis A, Zicat BA. Squeaking in ceramic-on-ceramic hips: the importance of acetabular component orientation. J Arthroplasty. 2007. 22:496–503.

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

9. Gruen TA, McNeice GM, Amstutz HC. "Modes of failure" of cemented stem-type femoral components: a radiographic analysis of loosening. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1979. (141):17–27.

10. Capello WN, D'Antonio JA, Manley MT, Feinberg JR. Hydroxyapatite in total hip arthroplasty. Clinical results and critical issues. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1998. (355):200–211.

11. Kawamura H, Dunbar MJ, Murray P, Bourne RB, Rorabeck CH. The porous coated anatomic total hip replacement. A ten to fourteen-year follow-up study of a cementless total hip arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2001. 83-A:1333–1333.

12. Engh CA, Bobyn JD, Glassman AH. Porous-coated hip replacement. The factors governing bone ingrowth, stress shielding, and clinical results. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1987. 69:45–55.

13. Rothman RH, Hozack WJ, Ranawat A, Moriarty L. Hydroxyapatite-coated femoral stems. A matched-pair analysis of coated and uncoated implants. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1996. 78:319–324.

14. Callaghan JJ, Dysart SH, Savory CG. The uncemented porous-coated anatomic total hip prosthesis. Two-year results of a prospective consecutive series. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1988. 70:337–346.

15. Livermore J, Ilstrup D, Morrey B. Effect of femoral head size on wear of the polyethylene acetabular component. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1990. 72:518–528.

16. Willert HG, Semlitsch M. Reactions of the articular capsule to wear products of artificial joint prostheses. J Biomed Mater Res. 1977. 11:157–164.

17. Bierbaum BE, Nairus J, Kuesis D, Morrison JC, Ward D. Ceramic-on-ceramic bearings in total hip arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2002. (405):158–163.

18. Pfaff HG. Ceramic component failure and the role of proof testing. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2000. (379):29–33.

19. Willmann G. Ceramic femoral head retrieval data. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2000. (379):22–28.

20. Han CD, Choi CJ, Yang IH, Lee DH. Total hip arthroplasty with ceramic-on-ceramic articulation-minimum 5-year follow-up results. J Korean Orthop Assoc. 2006. 41:421–427.

21. Yoo JJ, Kim YM, Yoon KS, et al. Alumina-on-alumina THA in active patients younger than 40 years old: a 5-year minimum follow-up study. J Korean Orthop Assoc. 2006. 41:404–412.

22. Garino JP. Modern ceramic-on-ceramic total hip systems in the Unites States: early results. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2000. (379):41–47.

23. Heekin RD, Callaghan JJ, Hopkinson WJ, Savory CG, Xenos JS. The porous-coated anatomic total hip prosthesis, inserted without cement. Results after five to seven years in a prospective study. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1993. 75:77–91.

24. Sedel L, Nizard R, Bizot P, Meunier A. Perspective on a 20-year experience with ceramic-on-ceramic articulation in total hip replacement. Semin Arthroplasty. 1998. 9:123–134.

25. Bos I, Willmann G. Morphologic characteristics of periprosthetic tissues from hip prostheses with ceramic-ceramic couples: a comparative histologic investigation of 18 revision and 30 autopsy cases. Acta Orthop Scand. 2001. 72:335–342.

TOOLS

Similar articles