Clinical Wear Performance of Metal-on-Metal Hip Arthroplasties

2009 ◽  
pp. 144-144-13 ◽  
Author(s):  
CB Rieker ◽  
P Köttig ◽  
R Schön ◽  
M Windler ◽  
UP Wyss
Keyword(s):  
Wear Performance ◽  
Metal On Metal ◽  
Hip Arthroplasties

scholarly journals Does diametrical clearance influence the wear of Pinnacle hip implants?

2020 ◽  
Vol 9 (8) ◽  
pp. 515-523 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sean Bergiers ◽  
Harry Hothi ◽  
Johann Henckel ◽  
Antti Eskelinen ◽  
John Skinner ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Volumetric Wear ◽  
Wear Performance ◽  
Wear Rates ◽  
Manufacturing Tolerance ◽  
Metal On Metal ◽  
Hip Arthroplasties ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
Spearman’S Correlation ◽  
Film Lubrication ◽  
Fluid Film Lubrication

Aims The optimum clearance between the bearing surfaces of hip arthroplasties is unknown. Theoretically, to minimize wear, it is understood that clearances must be low enough to maintain optimal contact pressure and fluid film lubrication, while being large enough to allow lubricant recovery and reduce contact patch size. This study aimed to identify the relationship between diametrical clearance and volumetric wear, through the analysis of retrieved components. Methods A total of 81 metal-on-metal Pinnacle hips paired with 12/14 stems were included in this study. Geometrical analysis was performed on each component, using coordinate and roundness measuring machines. The relationship between their as-manufactured diametrical clearance and volumetric wear was investigated. The Mann-Whitney U test and unpaired t-test were used, in addition to calculating the non-parametric Spearman's correlation coefficient, to statistically evaluate the acquired data. Results The hips in this study were found to have had a median unworn diametrical clearance of 90.31 μm (interquartile range (IQR) 77.59 to 97.40); 32% (n = 26) were found to have been below the manufacturing tolerance. There was no correlation found between clearance and bearing (rs = -0.0004, p = 0.997) or taper (rs = 0.0048, p = 0.966) wear rates. The wear performance of hips manufactured within and below these specifications was not significantly different (bearing: p = 0.395; taper: p = 0.653). Pinnacles manufactured from 2007 onwards had a greater prevalence of bearing clearance below tolerance (p = 0.004). Conclusion The diametrical clearance of Pinnacle hips did not influence their wear performance, even when below the manufacturing tolerance. The optimum clearance for minimizing hip implant wear remains unclear. Cite this article: Bone Joint Res 2020;9(8):515–523.

scholarly journals Wear performance of retrieved metal-on-metal Pinnacle hip arthroplasties implanted before and after 2007

2018 ◽  
Vol 7 (11) ◽  
pp. 595-600 ◽  
Author(s):  
S. Bergiers ◽  
H. S. Hothi ◽  
J. Henckel ◽  
A. Eskelinen ◽  
J. Skinner ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Linear Regression Models ◽  
Wear Performance ◽  
Wear Rates ◽  
Female Patients ◽  
High Profile ◽  
Metal On Metal ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Before And After ◽  
Hip Arthroplasties ◽  
Mean Time

ObjectivesPrevious studies have suggested that metal-on-metal (MoM) Pinnacle (DePuy Synthes, Warsaw, Indiana) hip arthroplasties implanted after 2006 exhibit higher failure rates. This was attributed to the production of implants with reduced diametrical clearances between their bearing surfaces, which, it was speculated, were outside manufacturing tolerances. This study aimed to better understand the performance of Pinnacle Systems manufactured before and after this event.MethodsA total of 92 retrieved MoM Pinnacle hips were analyzed, of which 45 were implanted before 2007, and 47 from 2007 onwards. The ‘pre-2007’ group contained 45 implants retrieved from 21 male and 24 female patients, with a median age of 61.3 years (interquartile range (IQR) 57.1 to 65.5); the ‘2007 onwards’ group contained 47 implants retrieved from 19 male and 28 female patients, with a median age of 61.8 years (IQR 58.5 to 67.8). The volume of material lost from their bearing and taper surfaces was measured using coordinate and roundness measuring machines. These outcomes were then compared statistically using linear regression models, adjusting for potentially confounding factors.ResultsThere was no significant difference between the taper and bearing wear rates of the ‘pre-2007’ and ‘2007 onwards’ groups (p = 0.67 and p = 0.39, respectively). Pinnacles implanted from 2007 onwards were revised after a mean time of 50 months, which was significantly earlier than the ‘pre-2007’ hips (96 months) (p < 0.001). A reduction in the time to revision was present year on year from 2003 to 2011.ConclusionWe found no difference in the wear rate of these implants based on the year of implantation. The ‘pre-2007’ hips had a two-fold greater time to revision than those implanted after 2007; this may be due to the increased surveillance of MoM hips following UK regulatory advice and several high-profile failures. Interestingly, we observed a decreasing trend in the mean time to revision every year from 2003 onwards. Cite this article: S. Bergiers, H. S. Hothi, J. Henckel, A. Eskelinen, J. Skinner, A. Hart. Wear performance of retrieved metal-on-metal Pinnacle hip arthroplasties implanted before and after 2007. Bone Joint Res 2018;7:595–600. DOI: 10.1302/2046-3758.711.BJR-2018-0143.R1.

scholarly journals Metal‐on‐metal bearings in total hip arthroplasties: Influence of cobalt and chromium ions on bacterial growth and biofilm formation

2008 ◽  
Vol 88A (3) ◽  
pp. 711-716 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anton H. Hosman ◽  
Henny C. van der Mei ◽  
Sjoerd K. Bulstra ◽  
Henk J. Busscher ◽  
Daniëlle Neut
Keyword(s):  
Bacterial Growth ◽  
Biofilm Formation ◽  
Total Hip ◽  
Chromium Ions ◽  
Metal On Metal ◽  
Hip Arthroplasties

scholarly journals Sequelae of large-head metal-on-metal hip arthroplasties

2016 ◽  
Vol 1 (10) ◽  
pp. 345-353 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christiaan P. van Lingen ◽  
Luigi M. Zagra ◽  
Harmen B. Ettema ◽  
Cees C. Verheyen
Keyword(s):  
Large Head ◽  
Metal On Metal ◽  
Hip Arthroplasties

Metal-on-metal surface hip arthroplasties. Is annual monitoring of blood metal levels necessary?

2018 ◽  
Vol 62 (6) ◽  
pp. 436-441
Author(s):  
D. Hernández-Vaquero ◽  
M. García-Pascual ◽  
S. Iglesias-Fernández ◽  
A. Escandon-Rodríguez
Keyword(s):  
Metal Surface ◽  
Metal On Metal ◽  
Metal Levels ◽  
Hip Arthroplasties

scholarly journals Failed Metal-on-Metal Hip Arthroplasties: A Spectrum of Clinical Presentations and Operative Findings

2010 ◽  
Vol 468 (9) ◽  
pp. 2313-2320 ◽  
Author(s):  
James A. Browne ◽  
C. Dustin Bechtold ◽  
Daniel J. Berry ◽  
Arlen D. Hanssen ◽  
David G. Lewallen
Keyword(s):  
Metal On Metal ◽  
Clinical Presentations ◽  
Operative Findings ◽  
Hip Arthroplasties

Declining Revision Burden of Metal-on-Metal Hip Arthroplasties

2019 ◽  
Vol 34 (9) ◽  
pp. 2058-2064.e1 ◽  
Author(s):  
Olli S. Lainiala ◽  
Aleksi P. Reito ◽  
Jyrki J. Nieminen ◽  
Antti P. Eskelinen
Keyword(s):  
Metal On Metal ◽  
Hip Arthroplasties
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document