header advert
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

TOTAL HIP PROSTHESES WITH CERAMIC-ON-CERAMIC ARTICULATIONS IN THE NORWEGIAN ARTHROPLASTY REGISTER



Abstract

Introduction: In an earlier publication we analysed short-term results of total hip arthroplasty (THA) with Ceramic-on-Ceramic (C-on-C) articulations, and we found that they did not perform better than the Charnley prosthesis with a metal-on-UHMWPE articulation.

Purpose: To examine mid-term results of THA with Con-C articulations, and to compare their results with the most commonly used cemented prosthesis in our register, the Charnley.

Materials and Methods: All THAs with C-on-C articulations were uncemented and they constituted 2506 THAs.

194 of the THAs had articulations with an Alumina liner and a femoral head made of a composite of Alumina and Zirconium oxide ceramic (Biolox delta). This group had a median follow-up of only 1.1 years, and the group was therefore not included in the survival analyses.

2312 of the THAs were uncemented prostheses with Alumina-on-Alumina articulations, with a follow-up of 0–11 years (median 4.3 years). For further analyses we included only patients under the age of 80 years (n = 2209).

We compared the two most common C-on-C cup/stem combinations: Igloo/Filler (n=1402) and Trilogy/SCP (n=363), and a group of others (n= 547). Further we compared the C-on-C prostheses with cemented Charnley prostheses in patients under the age of 80 years, operated during the same time-period. We also compared the C-on-C prostheses with Charnley prostheses in a group limited to patients under the age of 60 years. Prosthesis survival was estimated by Kaplan-Meier and Cox regression analyses adjusted for age and gender.

Results: In patients under the age of 80 years the Charnley prostheses had a statistically significant higher survival than the C-on-C prostheses at 7 years (97.1% and 95.7% respectively, p=0.04). In patients under 60 years of age these analyses gave similar results, although with no statistical significant difference between Charmley and the C-on-C prostheses (p=0.06). There was no statistically significant difference in revision risk among Igloo/Filler, Trilogy/SCP, and a group of all other combinations of cup/stem with a C-on-C articulation. The most common causes for revision of the C-on-C hips were dislocation (n=18) and deep infection (n=16). 3 were revised due to a broken liner and 4 due to a broken head. Of the 194 articulations with Alumina liner and Biolox delta head, one had been revised due to fractured head.

Conclusion: With a follow up of 0–11 years, we did not find superior results of the C-on-C prostheses compared to the Charnley prosthesis. Few revisions were clearly related to failure of the articulations.

Correspondence should be addressed to: EFORT Central Office, Technoparkstrasse 1, CH – 8005 Zürich, Switzerland. Tel: +41 44 448 44 00; Email: office@efort.org

Author: Leif Havelin, Norway

E-mail: leif.havelin@helse-bergen.no