Advertisement for orthosearch.org.uk
Orthopaedic Proceedings Logo

Receive monthly Table of Contents alerts from Orthopaedic Proceedings

Comprehensive article alerts can be set up and managed through your account settings

View my account settings

Visit Orthopaedic Proceedings at:

Loading...

Loading...

Full Access

CONVENTIONAL POLYETHYLENE VERSUS HIGHLY RETICULATED POLYETHYLENE: COMPARATIVE RANDOMIZED STUDY OF 102 CASES WITH 4 YEARS 8 MONTHS FOLLOW-UP



Abstract

Purpose of the study: The limitations of conventional polyethylene are well known (osteolysis). New bearing surfaces have been proposed for hip arthroplasty including new-generation polyethylene products.

Material and methods: We compared four bearings including one metal-on-metal and one ceramic-on-ceramic bearing with results not available for analysis at this 4 years 8 month follow-up. The comparative randomized study included 102 first intention total hip arthroplasties comparing a single variable: the bearing. Common elements were: metal-back press-fit cup (Fitmore) and cemented anatomic stem (Emeraude). Variable elements were: alpha Sulène insert + 28 metal head (n=53) versus alpha Dursul insert + 28 metal head (n=49). Clinical outcome was assessed with the Postel-Merle-d’Aubigné score and the Harris score. Radiological outcome was assessed with: wear (EBRA, semiautomatic linear radiographic penetration), cup migration according to EBRA, and radiographic changes in zone 7.

Results: After checking the validity of the files studied, clinical outcome was strictly the same for the two series: wear Sulène polyethylene 0.21 mm; Durasul polyethylene 0.1 mm. Cup migration was: Sulène polyethylene 0.13 mm; Durasul polyethylene 0.08 mm. Modifications of zone 7 were: Sulène polyethylene 17.8%; Durasul polyethylene 6.6%.

Conclusion: With 4 years 8 months follow-up, several elements are in favor of the new-generation polyethylene inserts, confirming theoretical results with mathematical models. This length of follow-up is insufficient to draw formal conclusions concerning in vivo aging.

Correspondence should be addressed to SOFCOT, 56 rue Boissonade, 75014 Paris, France.