Total hip arthroplasty (THA) in the young is challenging. The purpose of this study was to retrospectively determine the clinical, radiographic, and polyethylene wear rate of relatively young patients.
Methods
We evaluated the outcome of consecutive patients receiving primary THA who were under 40 years of age with a minimum 10-year follow-up. Indications for THA in these patients were osteoarthritis due to developmental dysplasia of the hip joint (9 hips), osteonecrosis of the femoral head (7 hips), juvenile idiopathic arthritis (2 hips), and osteoarthritis due to Perthes disease (1 hip). All THA were performed with a cross-linked ultra-high-molecular-weight polyethylene (XLPE) liner against zirconium heads with cementless implants.
Results
The average Japanese Orthopaedic Association hip score significantly improved from 42 to 93 points at the latest follow-up. The mean steady wear was 0.015 mm/year (maximum 0.033 mm/year), and the mean creep wear was 0.111 mm (maximum 0.4 mm). Osteolysis was observed around 1 acetabular component and 2 stems. 1 femoral component had subsidence over 5 mm. All of the femoral components achieved fixation with an optimal interface with spot welds at the latest follow-up. Stress shielding was observed in all hips.
Conclusions
THA using an XLPE liner against zirconium heads appeared to have improved THA longevity. However, the imaging findings in some cases were suggestive of wear debris. A rigorous continual follow-up is required for relatively young patients undergoing THA.
HarrisWHSledgeCBTotal hip and total knee replacement.N Engl J Med1990;323(11):725–731
2.
CortenKBourneRBCharronKDAuKRorabeckCHWhat works best, a cemented or cementless primary total hip arthroplasty?: minimum 17-year followup of a randomized controlled trial.Clin Orthop Relat Res2011, 469(1):209–217
3.
CortenKBourneRBCharronKDAuKRorabeckCHComparison of total hip arthroplasty performed with and without cement: a randomized trial.A concise follow-up, at twenty years, of previous reports. J Bone Joint Surg Am2011;93(14):1335–1338
4.
MallNANunleyRMZhuJJMaloneyWJBarrackRLClohisyJCThe incidence of acetabular osteolysis in young patients with conventional versus highly crosslinked polyethylene.Clin Orthop Relat Res2011, 469(2):372–381
5.
SpringerBDConnellySEOdumSMCementless femoral components in young patients: review and meta-analysis of total hip arthroplasty and hip resurfacing.J Arthroplasty2009, 246 Suppl2–8
6.
TorchiaMEKlassenRABiancoAJTotal hip arthroplasty with cement in patients less than twenty years old. Long-term results.J Bone Joint Surg Am1996, 78(7):995–1003
7.
FinkbonePRSeversonEPCabanelaMETrousdaleRTCeramic-on-ceramic total hip arthroplasty in patients younger than 20 years.J Arthroplasty2012, 27(2):213–219
8.
WangenHLereimPHolmIGundersonRReikeråsOHip arthroplasty in patients younger than 30 years: excellent ten to 16-year follow-up results with a HA-coated stem.Int Orthop2008, 32(2):203–208
9.
BuschVKlarenbeekRSlooffTSchreursBWGardeniersJCemented hip designs are a reasonable option in young patients.Clin Orthop Relat Res2010, 468(12):3214–3220
10.
EngesæterLBEngesæterIØFenstadAMLow revision rate after total hip arthroplasty in patients with pediatric hip diseases.Acta Orthop2012, 83(5):436–441
11.
ClohisyJCOryhonJMSeylerTMFunction and fixation of total hip arthroplasty in patients 25 years of age or younger.Clin Orthop Relat Res2010, 468(12):3207–3213
12.
LearmonthIDHeywoodAWKayeJDallDRadiological loosening after cemented hip replacement for juvenile chronic arthritis.J Bone Joint Surg Br1989, 71(2):209–212
13.
InghamEFisherJThe role of macrophages in osteolysis of total joint replacement.Biomaterials2005, 26(11):1271–1286
14.
SabokbarAKudoOAthanasouNATwo distinct cellular mechanisms of osteoclast formation and bone resorption in periprosthetic osteolysis.J Orthop Res2003, 21(1):73–80
15.
OrishimoKFClausAMSychterzCJEnghCARelationship between polyethylene wear and osteolysis in hips with a second-generation porous-coated cementless cup after seven years of follow-up.J Bone Joint Surg Am2003, 85-A61095–1099
16.
IwaseTWingstrandIPerssonBMKesterisUHasegawaYWingstrandHThe ScanHip total hip arthroplasty: radiographic assessment of 72 hips after 10 years.Acta Orthop Scand2002, 73(1):54–59
17.
DowdJESychterzCJYoungAMEnghCACharacterization of long-term femoral-head-penetration rates.Association with and prediction of osteolysis. J Bone Joint Surg Am2000, 82-A81102–1107
18.
WanZDorrLDNatural history of femoral focal osteolysis with proximal ingrowth smooth stem implant.J Arthroplasty1996, 11(6):718–725
19.
KurtzSMGawelHAPatelJDHistory and systematic review of wear and osteolysis outcomes for first-generation highly crosslinked polyethylene.Clin Orthop Relat Res2011, 469(8):2262–2277
20.
McCaldenRWMacDonaldSJRorabeckCHBourneRBChessDGCharronKDWear rate of highly cross-linked polyethylene in total hip arthroplasty.A randomized controlled trial. J Bone Joint Surg Am2009;91(4):773–782
21.
NakashimaYSatoTYamamotoTResults at a minimum of 10 years of follow-up for AMS and PerFix HA-coated cementless total hip arthroplasty: impact of cross-linked polyethylene on implant longevity.J Orthop Sci2013, 18(6):962–968
22.
NakashimaYHayashiKInadomeTHydroxyapatite-coating on titanium arc sprayed titanium implants.J Biomed Mater Res1997:35(3):287–298
23.
SatoTNakashimaYAkiyamaMWear resistant performance of highly cross-linked and annealed ultra-high molecular weight polyethylene against ceramic heads in total hip arthroplasty.J Orthop Res2012, 30(12):2031–2037
24.
KawanoSSonohataMShimazakiTKitajimaMMawatariMHotokebuchiTFailure analysis of alumina on alumina total hip arthroplasty with a layered acetabular component: minimum ten-year follow-up study.J Arthroplasty2013, 28(10):1822–1827
25.
CarlssonASGentzCFRadiographic versus clinical loosening of the acetabular component in noninfected total hip arthroplasty.Clin Orthop Relat Res1984,(185):145–150
26.
DeLeeJGCharnleyJRadiological demarcation of cemented sockets in total hip replacement.Clin Orthop Relat Res1976,(121):20–32
27.
GruenTAMcNeiceGMAmstutzHCModes of failure of cemented stem-type femoral components: a radiographic analysis of loosening.Clin Orthop Relat Res1979,(141):17–27
28.
EnghCAGlassmanAHGriffinWLMayerJGResults of cementless revision for failed cemented total hip arthroplasty.Clin Orthop Relat Res1988,(235):91–110
29.
ChristieMJDeBoerDKTrickLWFour to Seven-Year Clinical and Radiographic Results. Primary total hip arthroplasty with use of the modular S-ROM prosthesis. Four to seven-year clinical and radiographic results.J Bone Joint Surg Am1999, 81(12):1707–1716
30.
LivermoreJIlstrupDMorreyBEffect of femoral head size on wear of the polyethylene acetabular component.J Bone Joint Surg Am1990, 72(4):518–528
31.
MalcolmTLSzubskiCRNowackiASKlikaAKIannottiJPBarsoumWKActivity levels and functional outcomes of young patients undergoing total hip arthroplasty.Orthopedics2014, 37(11):e983–e992
32.
LedfordCKVapARBolognesiMPWellmanSSTotal hip arthroplasty in very young bone marrow transplant patients.J Surg Orthop Adv2015, 24(2):99–104
33.
FurnesOPaxtonECafriGDistributed analysis of hip implants using six national and regional registries: comparing metal-on-metal with metal-on-highly cross-linked polyethylene bearings in cementless total hip arthroplasty in young patients.J Bone Joint Surg Am2014, 961_suppl25–33
34.
GirardJGlorionCBonnometFFronDMigaudHRisk factors for revision of hip arthroplasties in patients younger than 30 years.Clin Orthop Relat Res2011, 469(4):1141–1147
35.
ManningDWChiangPPMartellJMGalanteJOHarrisWHIn vivo comparative wear study of traditional and highly cross-linked polyethylene in total hip arthroplasty.J Arthroplasty2005, 20(7):880–886
36.
DerbyshireBFisherJDowsonDHardakerCBrummittKComparative study of the wear of UHMWPE with zirconia ceramic and stainless steel femoral heads in artificial hip joints.Med Eng Phys1994, 16(3):229–236
37.
EnghCAJrStepniewskiASGinnSDA randomized prospective evaluation of outcomes after total hip arthroplasty using cross-linked marathon and non-cross-linked Enduron polyethylene liners.J Arthroplasty2006, 21(6 Suppl 2):17–25
