Large head ceramic-on-ceramic bearing in primary total hip arthroplasty: average 3-year follow-up of a multicentre study

Abstract

Background:

Surgeons are increasingly using larger femoral head sizes in total hip arthroplasty (THA) to improve stability and reduce the rate of dislocation, 1 of the leading causes of revision surgery. Large ceramic head sizes up to 48 mm can now be used with monoblock acetabular components. National registries have shown promising results at short-term with large diameter ceramic-on-ceramic THA, with very low revision rates.

This study reports on the average 3-year follow up of a press-fit monoblock large diameter acetabular shell with a pre-assembled ceramic liner, with emphasis on the radiographic outcome, complications related to the implantation of the cup, and the patient’s clinical outcome.

Methods:

170 hips in 169 patients were reviewed at an average 38 ± 5.8 months following surgery.

Results:

The radiographic review revealed no acetabular cup loosening, no osteolysis and no cup migration. 1 acetabular cup was revised for malposition. The patient clinical outcome and the satisfaction rate were excellent. At 3 years, 7.1% of patients complained of groin pain and 3.5% spontaneously reported hip joint generated noise. 1 patient sustained a non-recurrent traumatic hip dislocation 2 years post surgery.

Conclusions:

New technology should be introduced cautiously on the market. This is especially true for the large diameter ceramic monoblock acetabular component used in this study since it involves a new acetabular component design. At short term, we have not identified new modes of failure with this implant. Longer follow-up is still needed to assess the safety of large ceramic bearing in THA.

Keywords

Acetabular component ceramic-on-ceramic bearing monoblock cup outcome total hip arthroplasty

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Green

Howard

Porter

, et al. National joint registry for England, Wales, Northern Ireland and the Isle of Man: 13th Report, 2016.

Galvin

Jennings

Tipper

, et al. Wear and creep of highly crosslinked polyethylene against cobalt chrome and ceramic femoral heads. Proc Inst Mech Eng H 2010; 224: 1175–1183.

Australian Orthopaedic Association. National Joint Replacement Registry. Hip, knee & shoulder arthroplasty: 2017 Annual Report, 2017.

Green

Howard

Porter

, et al. National Joint Registry for England, Wales, Northern Ireland and the Isle of Man: 14th Annual Report, 2017.

Kurtz

Kocagöz

Hanzlik

, et al. Do ceramic femoral heads reduce taper fretting corrosion in hip arthroplasty? A retrieval study. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2013; 471: 3270–3282.

Howard

Wall

PDH

Fernandez

, et al. Ceramic-on-ceramic bearing fractures in total hip arthroplasty: an analysis of data from the national joint registry. Bone Joint J 2017; 99-B: 1012–1019.

Rodriguez

Cooper

HJ.

Large ceramic femoral heads: what problems do they solve?

Bone Joint J 2013; 95-B(Suppl. A): 63–66.

Cooper

Della Valle

CJ.

Large diameter femoral heads: is bigger always better?

Bone Joint J 2014; 96-B(Suppl. A): 23–26.

McDonnell

Boyce

Baré

, et al. The incidence of noise generation arising from the large-diameter Delta Motion ceramic total hip bearing. Bone Joint J 2013; 95-B: 160–165.

10.

Tai

Munir

Walter

, et al. Squeaking in large diameter ceramic-on-ceramic bearings in total hip arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 2015; 30: 282–285.

11.

Goldhofer

Munir

Levy

, et al. Increase in benign squeaking rate at five-year follow-up: results of a large diameter ceramic-on-ceramic bearing in total hip arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 2018; 33: 1210–1214.

12.

Bartelt

Yuan

Trousdale

, et al. The prevalence of groin pain after metal-on-metal total hip arthroplasty and total hip resurfacing. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2010; 468: 2346–2356.

13.

Browne

Polga

Sierra

, et al. Failure of larger-diameter metal-on-metal total hip arthroplasty resulting from anterior iliopsoas impingement. J Arthroplasty 2011; 26: 978.e5–8.

14.

Lavigne

Laffosse

Ganapathi

, et al. Residual groin pain at a minimum of two years after metal-on-metal THA with a twenty-eight-millimeter femoral head, THA with a large-diameter femoral head, and hip resurfacing. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2011; 93(Suppl. 2): 93–98.

15.

Tidermark

Bergström

Responsiveness of the EuroQol (EQ-5D) and the Nottingham health profile (NHP) in elderly patients with femoral neck fractures. Qual Life Res 2007; 16: 321–330.

16.

Nilsdotter

Bremander

Measures of hip function and symptoms: harris hip score (HHS), hip disability and osteoarthritis outcome score (HOOS), Oxford hip score (OHS), Lequesne index of severity for osteoarthritis of the hip (LISOH), and American academy of orthopedic surgeons (AAOS) Hip and knee questionnaire. Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken) 2011; 63(Suppl. 11): S200–S207.

17.

Agarwala

Mohrir

Moonot

Functional outcome following a large head total hip arthroplasty: a retrospective analysis of mid term results. Indian J Orthop 2014; 48: 410–414.

18.

Bishop

Hothan

Morlock

MM.

High friction moments in large hard-on-hard hip replacement bearings in conditions of poor lubrication. J Orthop Res 2013; 31: 807–813.

19.

Langton

Sidaginamale

Lord

, et al. Taper junction failure in large-diameter metal-on-metal bearings. Bone Joint Res 2012; 1: 56–63.

20.

Cho

Choi

Kim

JJ.

Current Concepts of using large femoral heads in total hip arthroplasty. Hip Pelvis 2016; 28: 134–141.

21.

Deny

Barry

Hutt

JRB

, et al. Effect of sleeved ceramic femoral heads on titanium ion release. Hip Int 2018; 28: 139–144.

22.

Beraudi

Stea

De Pasquale

, et al. Metal ion release: also a concern for ceramic-on-ceramic couplings? Hip Int 2014; 24: 321–326.