Abstract
Introduction
Alternative bearings – metal-on-metal and ceramic-on-ceramic bearings have been introduced in the last decade with the aim to diminish wear and, subsequently, aseptic loosening and osteolysis. These bearings were aimed for younger, more active patients. Clinical results which would compare the performance of various alternative and traditional bearings are scarce.
Methods
Between January 2000 and December 2002, we performed 487 total hip replacements in 474 patients using three types of bearings: metal-on-metal (MOM), metal-on-polyethylene (MOP), and ceramic-on-ceramic (COC). All patients received the same type of acetabular cup (Bicon-Plus, Plus Orthopedics) and same type of femoral component (SL-Plus, Plus Orthopedics). We used the hospital computer database for the evaluation of patient data and data on revision operations.
Results
At a mean follow-up of 8.5 years (range, 6.8 to 9.9 years), eighteen hips were revised. Seventeen revisions were aseptic, and one was septic. The percentage of revision in the whole group was 3.7%. The percentage of revisions for individual groups of bearings varied and ranged from 1.5% in the MOP group, 4.1% in the COC group to 8.7% in the MOM group. Reasons for revisions were analyzed in details. We noticed that the percentage of aseptic loosening differed among the groups, with the MOM group having the highest percentage of revisions due to aseptic loosening.
Conclusions
The results obtained for this large series of THRs with the same type of acetabular and femoral components, and differing only in the type of bearing, indicate that the combination of material of acetabular cup and femoral head affect the performance of the hip prosthesis.
