Introduction & aims. Total hip replacement is an excellent treatment option for people with late stage degenerative hip disease. In addition to marked reduction in pain and improvement in sleep, most people regain range of motion, physical ability and quality of life. This study aimed at the functional outcomes of large diameter heads in THR patients. Method. This study is an analysis of a cohort of patients undergoing total hip replacement performed at our hospital from November 2011 to July 2013. A total of 70 hips, 40 males and 30 females, were operated upon with large diameter femoral heads. The mean age was 50.38 years (range 40–59 years). In our cohort, 32 patients had AVN of femur head, 19 had post traumatic secondary degeneration, 10 had RA, 6 had AS and 3 patients had OA of hip. The follow-up data included local complications, Harris Hip Score, medical complications, readmission, activity status and use of a walking aid. Results. Harris hip score at final follow up was, 33 cases had excellent, 26 cases had good result. None of the patient had fair or poor result. Two cases of superficial infection were observed. One case of dislocation was observed in post operative period which was reduced under GA and patient was given abduction brace. The mean follow up was 16.31 months ranging from 6 to 32 months. During the follow up, we had mortality of two patients. One died at 14 months due to myocardial infarction and the cause of other died due to CVA at 10 months follow up. Conclusions. Lower dislocation rate and better range of motion in majority of cases reinforces the advantage of large diameter head in THR in young and active patients. For any figures or tables, please contact authors directly (see Info & Metrics tab above).

Corrosion at the taper interface between the femoral head and the femoral stem is well described in metal-on-polyethylene (MoP) hips but previously was undetermined in large diameter head metal-on-metal (LHMoM) hips. The high failure rate of the articulating surface replacement (ASR) XL hip system has been partly attributed to susceptibility to corrosive damage at the taper interface. It was not known if other hip manufacturers are liable to taper corrosion. Therefore the aim of this study was to quantify the prevalence and severity of taper corrosion in LHMoM hips and compare corrosion across five different current generation manufacturers. Taper corrosion was analysed in a consecutive series of the five most common hip types at our retrieval centre: ASR XL, DePuy (n=49); Birmingham hip resurfacing, Smith & Nephew (n=33), Durom, Zimmer (n=31), M2a Magnum, Biomet (n=14) and Cormet, Stryker (n=10). A four-scale peer-reviewed qualitative corrosion scoring system was used to quantify corrosion (none, mild, moderate and severe). Evidence of corrosion was observed in 86% of components, with at least moderate corrosion observed in 61%. No difference in corrosion was observed between the ASR XL and the other manufacturers (p=0.202). There was still no difference seen when all manufacturers were compared individually (p=0.363). A positive correlation was observed between corrosion and femoral head diameter (r=0.224, p=0.021). However no relationship was observed with implantation time (r=0.163, p=0.118). Our study indicates that taper corrosion is common in LHMoM hips and affects all hip types equally. The clinical significance of this finding is that all hip types will be susceptible to the complications of corrosion, such as third body wear and osteolysis. Furthermore recent reports indicate that corrosive debris released from the taper interface may play a role in the formation of pseudotumours and adverse soft-tissue reactions. We found that larger femoral head sizes showed greater corrosion, which suggests that high torque increases fretting corrosion of the taper interface. Future work must determine the optimum femoral head size and investigate the chemical composition of the corrosive debris

Purpose of the study: The tribologic characteristics of the metal-on-metal bearing enabled the introduction of large-diameter femoral heads on a conventional stem with the aim of improving implant stability. Our work was designed to determine whether the short-term outcomes corroborate this hypothesis and identify any specific complications. Material and methods: This was a comparative study of two series of non-cemented total hip arthroplasties (THA) with a high-carbon content metal-on-metal bearing: 250 25 mm arthroplasties implanted from August 2001 to April 2004; 250 large-diameter arthroplasties implanted from August 2003 to December 2006. The two series were comparable regarding age, gender, BMI, aetiology, Devane and Harris scores preoperatively (r2=0.98; p< 0.001). Patients were reviewed at mean 5 years 5 months (28mm) and 3 years 1 months (large diameter). Results: The analysis was possible for 224 implants in the 28 mm series and 242 in the large diameter series. Clinically, the Merle-d’Aubigné et Harris scores were highly comparable between the series; the activity item on the UCLA score revealed better results in the anatomic head series (6.09 versus 6.81; p< 0.0039). Regarding complications: There was one cases of implant migration in the large diameter series with preservation of the good outcome and no revision. For dislocations: anatomic head (n=1, 0.4% with revision); 28 mm head (n=7, 2.8% with four revisions). One particular case of one patient with a large diameter head presented two episodes of localised recurrent cellulitis under regular surveillance. Metal ion assays (medians): Cr.− 1.55μg/l for 28mm; 2.21μg/l for large diameter; Co. − 1.10μg/l for 28mm; 1.92μg/l for large diameter. Discussion: Our results provide objective evidence of the improvement in the stability of the prosthesis joint and in the functional outcome, confirming the few results published to date. Conversely, while we did have less technical failures than published series, we did find significantly higher metal ion levels in the large diameter series, in contrast with prior data. The neck length being modulated with the intermediary piece, the potential corrosion might be the only cause of this difference

Introduction: Metal on metal hip replacement using large diameter bearings can be used as part of a hip resurfacing (HR) system or with a large diameter head total hip arthroplasty (LDH-THA). Both types of implant release metal ion, but the amount of ion released after LDH-THA has not been studied. The aim of the present study was to assess whole blood metal ion release at one year following LDH-THA. Material and Method: Pre and post operative Cr, Co and Ti concentrations in whole blood were measured using a high resolution mass spectrometer (HR-ICP-MS) in 29 patients with LDH-THA (Durom LDH, Zimmer). The results were compared to published ion levels on a HR system (Durom, Zimmer) possessing the same tribological characteristics, the only differences being the presence of a modular sleeve and opened femoral head design in LDH-THA. Summary of results: Post operative Cr, Co and Ti mean levels of LDH-THA were 1.3, 2.0 and 2.8 μg/L at 6 months and 1.3, 2.2 and 2.7 μg/L at 12 months. In the LDH-THA, the opened femoral head design showed significantly higher Co ion concentrations than the closed femoral head design (3.0 vs 1.8 ug/L, p=0.037). Compared to previously published results after HR, Co levels were significantly higher at one year in the LDH THA (2.2 ug/L vs. 0.7 ug/L, p< 0.001). Discussion: In order to reduce wear and ion release from metal-metal bearing, most manufacturers focus research on improvements at the bearing surfaces. This study has demonstrated that the addition of a sleeve with modular junctions and an open femoral head design of LDH-THA causes more Co release than bearing surface wear (157% and 67% respectively). Even if no pathological metal ion threshold level has been determined, efforts should be made to minimize their release. We recommend modification or abandonment of the modular junction and femoral head closed design for this specific LDH-THA system. The total amount of ion released from a metal-metal implant should be considered globally and newer implant design should be scientifically evaluated before their widespread clinical use

The metal on metal implants was introduced without the proper stepwise introduction. The ASR resurfacing hip arthroplasty (RHA) withdrawn due to high clinical failure rates and the large diameter head THA (LDH-THA) are also widely abandoned. Early (2 year) radiostereometry studies does not support early instability as cause of failure but more likely metal wear products. A possible advantage may be maintenance of bone mineral density (BMD). We present 5 year prospective follow up from a randomized series, aiming to report changes from baseline and to investigate links between implant micromotion, Cr & Co ions and BMD. Patients eligible for an artificial hip were randomized to RHA, Biomet LDH-THA or standard Biometric THA. 19, 17 and 15 patients completed 5 year follow-up. All followed with BMD of the femur, acetabulum and for RHA the collum. RHA and THA with whole blood Co and Co. LDH-THA only at 5 year. RHA had marker based RSA of both components, cup only for LDH-THA. Translations were compiled to total translation (TT= √(x. 2. +y. 2. +z. 2. )). Data were collected at baseline, 8 weeks, 6 months, 1, 2 and 5 years. Statistical tests: ANCOVA for TT movement, Spearman's correlation for BMD, Cr, Co and BMI to TT at 5 years. RSA: The 5 year median (25%to75%) RHA cup translations were X=-0.00(−0.49 to 0.19) Y=0.15(−0.03 to 0.20), z=0.24(−0.42 to 0.37) and TT 0.58 (0.16 to 1.82) mm. For the LDH-THA X=−0.33(−0.90 to 0.20) Y=0.28(0.02 to 0.54), z=0.43(−1.12 to −0.19) and TT 1.06 (0.97 to 1.72) mm. The TT was statistically different (p<0.05) for the two cups. The RHA femoral component moved X=0.37(0.21 to 0.56) Y=0.02(−0.07 to 0.11), z=-0.01(−0.07 to 0.26) and TT 0.48 (0.29 to 0.60) mm at 5 years. There was no TT movement from year 2. The mean (SD) acetabular BMD was diminished to 93(90–97)% for RHA and 97(93–99.9)% for THA, but LDH-THA maintained 99(95–103)%. Overall femoral BMD was unchanged at 5 years for all interventions, but both stemmed implants lost 17% at the calcar. Median (25%to75%) whole-blood Cr peaked in the LDH-THA group with 1.7 (0.9 to 3.1) followed by RHA 1.2 (0.8 to 5.0) and THA with 0.5 (0.4 to 0.7)ppb. For Co the highest levels were found in RHA with 1.6(0.8 to 4.7) followed by LDH-THA 1.2 (0.7–1.7) and THA 0.2 (0.2 to 0.6) ppb. The only correlations above +/−0.3 for TT were the RHA femoral component with a correlation of 0.47 to BMI, 0.30 to Co and Cr. The ASR cup conversely had a negative correlation of −0.60 to BMI and again, the LDH-THA cup had a negative correlation of −0.37 to Cr. In contrast to registered revision rates, we found significantly larger movement for the Biomet cup than the ASR cup. The metal ion levels were similar. The LDH-THA cup maintained the acetabular BMD best at 5 years, but the difference was small, we are limited by small numbers and the correlations between TT and the covariates showed no clear pattern

In metal-on-metal (MoM) total hip arthroplasty, the taper interface is where the femoral head (female taper surface) attaches to the trunnion (male taper) of the femoral stem. Corrosion is well reported in metal-on-polyethylene hips but little is known about taper corrosion in MoM devices. The aim of this study was to quantify corrosion in modern-generation stemmed MoM hip systems and gain insight into the nature of the underlying corrosive attack.

Taper corrosion was quantified in 161 failed MoM components (head components n=128; femoral stem n=33) from nine hip types with the use of a qualitative subjective scoring system. An unanticipated finding on preliminary inspection of the hips was a region on the female taper surface that contained ridges that directly corresponded with the ridged microthread on the trunnion. The ridges were not present on unimplanted (control) female taper surfaces and therefore a novel four-scale subjective scoring system was devised to quantify the prevalence and severity of this ‘imprinting’ phenomenon.

Evidence of corrosion was observed in 81% (131/161) of components, with at least moderate corrosion observed in 58% (94/161). Corrosion was greater on the female taper surface than on the male taper (p=0.034) and the two scores were associated (r=0.784, p=0.001). Imprinting affected all manufacturers and was observed in 64% (82/128) of head components. The corrosion and imprinting scores were strongly correlated (r=0.694, p=0.001). Corrosion was largely confined to the area of the female taper interface where imprinting had occurred i.e. the region that had been in contact with the trunnion microthread. Scanning electron microscopy showed evidence of fretting corrosion and substantial mechanical wear within the ridged region on the female taper surface.

Our study indicates that MoM hips are susceptible to taper corrosion. We believe it occurs by a process of “mechanically-assisted crevice corrosion,” involving the following sequence of events: joint fluid enters the taper junction as a result of pumping of fluid along the machined microthread of the trunnion. This results in galvanic corrosion of the anodic surface (the cobalt-chromium femoral head or taper sleeve). The pattern of corrosion of the head taper is determined by the surface profile of the screw thread of the trunnion, thus leaving an imprinted appearance. Historically the ridged microthread was introduced to trunnions to minimise the risk of burst fracture of ceramic heads. However this study indicates that the ridges are detrimental in MoM hips by causing extensive mechanical wear. Thus the possibility that cobalt-chrome and ceramic femoral head components require different trunnion designs needs urgent investigation.

Introduction

Current literature supports the use of total hip replacement (THR) for the treatment of displaced intra-capsular proximal femoral fractures (DIPFF). Case series of patients receiving this treatment show dislocation rates higher than that of patients who have THR to treat osteoarthritis. Large diameter THR have mechanical advantages in terms of dislocation and their role in PFF has yet to be assessed.

Early failure of metal-on-metal (MoM) total hip replacements (THR) is now well established. We review 93 consecutive patients with CPT¯ stems MoM THR. Our series demonstrates a new mechanism of failure, which may be implant combination specific.

Between January 2005 and June 2009, 93 consecutive MoM total hip replacements were preformed using CPT stems by 3 surgeons at our unit. 73 CPT¯ stems, Metasul¯ Large Diameter Heads (LDH) with Durom¯ acetabulae and 20 CPT¯ stems, Metasul¯ 28mm diameter heads in Allofit¯ shells (zimmer). Clinical outcomes were collected prospectively before surgery, at 3 months, 1 year, 2 years, 3 years, and at 5 years post surgery. Revision for any cause was taken as the primary endpoint and the roentgenograms and explanted prostheses were analyzed for failure patterns.

In the LDH/Durom¯ group a total of 13 (18%) patients required revision (figs. 1) at a median of 35 months (range 6-44). 6 (8%) for periprosthetic fracture. All 6 periprostethic fractures were associated with minimal or no trauma and all had ALVAL identified histologically.

To date there have been no failures in the CPT¯/28mm head Allofit¯ group. Several failures demonstrated bone loss in Gruen zones 8 ± 9 ± 10 (fig. 2).

We demonstrate an unacceptably high rate of failure in CPT¯ MoM LDH hip replacements, with a high failure secondary to periprosthetic fracture and postulate a mechanism associated with local toxicity to metal ions. We strongly advise against this combination of prosthesis.

Purpose: Clinical studies still show significant variability in offset and leg length reconstruction after 28mmTHA. Precise restoration of hip biomechanics is important since it reduces wear and improves stability, abductor function and patient satisfaction. There is a tendency to increase offset and leg length to ensure stability of 28mmTHA. This may not be needed with the more stable LDHTHA and hip resurfacing implants, therefore potentially improving the precision of the hip reconstruction. The aim of this study was to verify this assumption.

Method: Leg length and femoral offset were measured on standardized digital radiographs with a computer software in 254 patients (49 HR, 74 LDHTHA, 132 28mmTHA) with unilateral hip involvement and compared to the normal contralateral side.

Results: Femoral offset was increased in 72% of 28mmTHA (mean +3.3mm), 56% of LDHTHA (mean +1.0mm) and 8% of HR (mean −3.2mm) (intergroup differences p< 0.05). The mean LLI was greater after 28mmTHA (+2,29mm) vs. (−0.45mm for LDHTHA and −1.8mm for HR). The percentage of patients with increased leg length > 4mm was greater for 28mmTHA (11%) compared to LDHTHA (2.7%) and HR (2%).

Conclusion: The stability afforded by the larger head of LDHTHA reduces the surgeon’s tendency to increased leg length and femoral offset to avoid instability as during 28mmTHA. In addition, compared to HR, LDHTHA allows more precise restoration of equal leg length and femoral offset in patient with greater pre operative deformities (low femoral offset and LLI > 1cm). LDHTHA may represent the most precise method of hip joint reconstruction.

Purpose: The long term exposure to metal ions released from metal-metal articulations is worrying. Studies have shown comparable ion level between metal-metal HR and 28mmTHA. No study has analyzed the amount of ion released from LDH-THA. We compared the amount of ion released from HR and LDH-THA from the same manufacturer.

Method: Whole-blood concentrations of Cobalt was measured prospectively (pre op, 3, 6, 12, 24 months) with HR-ICPMS in 74 HR and 54 LDH-THA with the same metal bearing characteristics and acetabular component (monoblock Cobalt-Chrome with titanium plasma-spray coating). The femoral head of LDH-THA was inserted on a titanium stem with a Cobalt-Chrome adapter sleeve to adjust offset and leg length.

Results: Demographic data was similar. The pre op Cobalt level (ug/L) were 0.10 vs. 0.11, 3 months 0.90 vs. 0.84, 6 months 0.90 vs. 1.28, 12 months 0.68 vs.1.75, and 24 months 0.56 (5.6X preop level) vs. 1.82 (16.5X preop level) in the HR and LDH-THA groups, respectively. The cobalt level decreased after 6 months in HR, whereas it was still increasing at 2y with LDH-THA.

Conclusion: In order to reduce wear and ion release from metal-metal bearing, most manufacturers focus research on improvements at the bearing surfaces. This study has shown that the simple addition of a sleeve with 2 modular junctions can results in a dramatic increase in ion release, diminishing the value of improvements made at the bearing surface. The total amount of ion released from a metal-metal implant should be considered globally and as such, better modular taper designs should be developed.

Introduction: Better clinical outcome is generally reported after hip resurfacing when compared to conventional 28mmTHA. This may simply be the consequences of biased patient selection, patient perception or the advantageous use of larger diameter femoral heads in HR. The true clinical benefits of HR can only be assessed by comparison with LDH-THA in a blinded randomized study to eliminate/reduce those biases. This was the aim of the study.

Materials and Methods: Charnley class A patients were randomized between HR or LDH-THA and kept blinded for one year. Clinical data, gait analysis, postural balance evaluations and functional tests were performed preoperatively, at 3, 6, 12 and 24 months postoperatively. 14 normal patients served as controls.

Results: 24 patients were assigned to each group. There was no significant difference in WOMAC, SF-36, activity scores, and patient satisfaction. A slight advantage was observed for HR during the functional reach test (postural balance) and for LDH-THA during the step test (speed, strength and balance), all other tests showing no differences. Both groups quickly reached controls value for all tests by 3 months.

Discussion: We have failed to demonstrate a clear difference in outcome between HR and LDH-THA. Both groups fully recovered quickly. The postulated clinical advantages of HR over 28mmTHA most likely result from using a larger head in highly motivated patients. The only clear advantage of HR over LDH-THA remains proximal femoral bone conservation, although with the excellent durability of currently used femoral stems, HR has to demonstrate comparable survivorship before bone conservation is considered a true benefit.

Purpose: Better clinical outcome is generally reported after hip resurfacing when compared to conventional 28mmTHA. This may simply be the consequences of biased patient selection, patient perception or the advantageous use of larger diameter femoral heads in HR. The true clinical benefits of HR can only be assessed by comparison with LDH-THA in a blinded randomized study to eliminate/reduce those biases. This was the aim of the study.

Method: Charnley class A patients were randomized between HR or LDH-THA and kept blinded for one year. Clinical data, gait analysis, postural balance evaluations and functional tests were performed pre-operatively at 3, 6, 12 and 24 months postoperatively. Fourteen normal patients served as controls.

Results: Twenty-four patients were assigned to each group. There was no significant difference in WOMAC, SF-36, activity scores, and patient satisfaction. A slight advantage was observed for HR during the functional reach test (postural balance) and for LDH-THA during the step test (speed, strength and balance), all other tests showing no differences. Both groups quickly reached controls value for all tests by 3 months.

Conclusion: We have failed to demonstrate a clear difference in outcome between HR and LDH-THA. Both groups fully recovered quickly. The postulated clinical advantages of HR over 28mmTHA most likely result from using a larger head in highly motivated patients. The only clear advantage of HR over LDH-THA remains proximal femoral bone conservation, although with the excellent durability of currently used femoral stems, HR has to demonstrate comparable survivorship before bone conservation is considered a true benefit.

The use of metal-on-metal THA has taken origin from the use of Mc Kee prostheses in our Institute in 1967. In 3rd Division of “Istituto Gaetano Pini” in Milan have been performed more than 1300 implants of these prostheses between 1967 and 1983. The analyses of implant surfaces after removal have demonstrated an almost null debris and good liability regarding implant stability. Even if someone assumed, in the past, the carcinogenic effects induced by metal debris, recent publications showed no statistically significant differences in the incidence of cancer between patients treated with metal-on-metal prostheses and normal population. The very good results in follow-up and the evidence of limited debris of metallic contact surfaces have encouraged us to continue with this experience using large head prostheses with metal-on-metal interface. We implanted 73 Artek cup in 1997–2000 years, an uncemented pre-assembled cup, fixed by pure press fit. The advantages with this cup derived from his low profile (1/3rd of sphere) and contemporary use of large diameter heads (38 mm), similar to McKee’s model (35–41.5 mm). This design allowed us not only to preserve bone-stock, but even to reduce displacement risk. These advantages were increased by the absence of interposed PE surfaces, which inevitably suffer from time-related degeneration. In the last years we increase the use of hard surface THA, usually performing the implant of pressfit cups with metallic liner and large diameter heads (32 and 36 mm) or ceramic-ceramic interface. We believe in better indication (null-wear) of ceramic-ceramic THA in < 60 years patients (even in older ones high functional requests). Usually > 60 years we implant metal-on metal THA: we think that can guarantee very low debris rates and, if used in association with modular components and large diameter heads, a sensibly increased ROM and lower displacement rate. We implanted 73 Artek cup in 1997–2000 years, an uncemented pre-assembled cup, fixed by pure pressfit. The advantages with this cup derived from his low profile (1/3rd of sphere) and contemporary use of large diameter heads (38 mm), similar to McKee’s model (35–41.5 mm). This design allowed us not only to preserve bone-stock, but even to reduce displacement risk. These advantages were increased by the absence of interposed PE surfaces, which inevitably suffer from time-related degeneration. In the last years we increase the use of hard surface THA, usually performing the implant of pressfit cups with metallic liner and large diameter heads (32 and 36 mm) or ceramic-ceramic interface. We believe in better indication (null-wear) of ceramic-ceramic THA in < 60 years patients (even in older ones high functional requests). Usually > 60 years we implant metal-on metal THA: we think that can guarantee very low debris rates and, if used in association with modular components and large diameter heads, a sensibly increased ROM and lower displacement rate. The common use of hard surface THA has to be considered “gold standard” even in the elderly, in a constantly increasing mean-life era with corresponding better quality of life: we believe that is mandatory to offer, even to these patients, a long-lasting and high result hip arthroplasty

The number one reason to consider large heads in total hip arthroplasty (THA) is for increased stability. Large diameter femoral heads substantially increase stability by virtue of increased range of motion and increased jump distance, which is the amount of displacement required to sublux the head out of the socket. Prevention is the best means for reducing dislocation, with requisites for stability being appropriate component position, restoration of leg length, and restoration of offset. In a review from our center studying the frequency of dislocation with small diameter femoral heads (≤32 mm) in 1262 patients (1518 hips) who underwent primary THA performed via a direct lateral approach, we observed a dislocation rate of 0.8% (12 of 1518). In a subsequent study of 1748 patients (2020 hips) who underwent primary THA at our center with large diameter heads (mean 43 mm, range 36–60 mm), we observed a substantially lower 0.04% frequency of dislocation (one of 2010) at a mean followup of 2.6 years. Our findings have been echoed in studies from several other centers. Howie et al. reported a prospective controlled trial of 644 low risk patients undergoing primary or revision THA randomised to receive either a 36 mm or 28 mm metal head articulated on highly crosslinked polyethylene. They observed significantly lower frequency of frequency of dislocation with 36 mm heads both overall (1.3%, 4 of 299 versus 5.4%, 17 of 216 with 28 mm heads, p=0.012) and in primary use (0.8%, 2 of 258 versus 4.4%, 12 of 275 with 28 mm heads, p=0.024), and a similar trend in their smaller groups of revision patients (5%, 2 of 41, versus 12%, 5 of 41 with 28 mm heads, p=0.273). Lachiewicz and Soileau reported on early and late dislocation with 36- and 40 mm heads in 112 patients (122 hips) at presumed high risk for dislocation who underwent primary THA. Risk factors were age >75 for 80 hips, proximal femur fracture for 18, history of contralateral dislocation for 2, history of alcohol abuse in 2, large acetabulum (>60 mm) in 6, and other reasons in 14. Early dislocation (<1 year) occurred in 4% (5 of 122), all with 36 mm heads. Late dislocation (>5 years) did not occur in any of the 74 patients with followup beyond 5 years. Stroh et al. compared 225 patients (248 hips) treated with THA using small diameter heads (<36 mm) to 501 patients (559 hips) treated with THA using large diameter heads (≥36 mm). There were no dislocations with large diameter heads compared with 1.8% (10 of 559) with small diameter heads. Allen et al. studied whether or not large femoral heads improve functional outcome after primary THA via the posterior approach in 726 patients. There were 399 done with small heads (<36 mm), 254 with medium heads (36 mm), and 73 with large heads (>36 mm), analyzed pre-operatively, at 6 months, and at 12 months. The authors could not find a correlation between increasing head size and improved function at one year, but observed that dislocation was reduced with large diameter heads. Optimization of hip biomechanics via proper surgical technique, component position, and restoration of leg length and offset are mandatory in total hip arthroplasty. Large heads enhance stability by increasing range of motion prior to impingement and enhancing jump stability

The number one reason to consider large heads in total hip arthroplasty (THA) is for increased stability. Large diameter femoral heads substantially increase stability by virtue of increased range of motion and increased jump distance, which is the amount of displacement required to sublux the head out of the socket. Prevention is the best means for reducing dislocation, with requisites for stability being appropriate component position, restoration of leg length, and restoration of offset. In a review from our center studying the frequency of dislocation with small diameter femoral heads (≤32 mm) in 1262 patients (1518 hips) who underwent primary THA performed via a direct lateral approach, we observed a dislocation rate of 0.8% (12 of 1518). In a subsequent study of 1748 patients (2020 hips) who underwent primary THA at our center with large diameter heads (mean 43 mm, range 36–60 mm), we observed a substantially lower 0.04% frequency of dislocation (one of 2010) at a mean followup of 2.6 years. Our findings have been echoed in studies from several other centers. Howie et al. reported a prospective controlled trial of 644 low risk patients undergoing primary or revision THA randomised to receive either a 36 mm or 28 mm metal head articulated on highly crosslinked polyethylene. They observed significantly lower frequency of frequency of dislocation with 36 mm heads both overall (1.3%, 4 of 299 versus 5.4%, 17 of 216 with 28 mm heads, p=0.012) and in primary use (0.8%, 2 of 258 versus 4.4%, 12 of 275 with 28 mm heads, p=0.024), and a similar trend in their smaller groups of revision patients (5%, 2 of 41 versus 12%, 5 of 41 with 28 mm heads, p=0.273). Lachiewicz and Soileau reported on early and late dislocation with 36- and 40 mm heads in 112 patients (122 hips) at presumed high risk for dislocation who underwent primary THA. Risk factors were age >75 for 80 hips, proximal femur fracture for 18, history of contralateral dislocation for 2, history of alcohol abuse in 2, large acetabulum (>60 mm) in 6, and other reasons in 14. Early dislocation (<1 year) occurred in 4% (5 of 122), all with 36 mm heads. Late dislocation (>5 years) did not occur in any of the 74 patients with follow up beyond 5 years. Stroh et al. compared 225 patients (248 hips) treated with THA using small diameter heads (<36 mm) to 501 patients (559 hips) treated with THA using large diameter heads (≥36 mm). There were no dislocations with large diameter heads compared with 1.8% (10 of 559) with small diameter heads. Allen et al. studied whether or not large femoral heads improve functional outcome after primary THA via the posterior approach in 726 patients. There were 399 done with small heads (<36 mm), 254 with medium heads (36 mm), and 73 with large heads (>36 mm), analyzed preoperatively, at 6 months, and at 12 months. The authors could not find a correlation between increasing head size and improved function at one year, but observed that dislocation was reduced with large diameter heads. Optimization of hip biomechanics via proper surgical technique, component position, and restoration of leg length and offset are mandatory in total hip arthroplasty. Large heads enhance stability by increasing range of motion prior to impingement and enhancing jump stability

Dislocation following revision THA remains a leading cause of failure. Integrity of the abductor muscles is a major contributor to stability. Large diameter heads (LDH), Dual Mobility (DM) and Constrained Acetabular Liners (CAL) are enhanced stability options but the indication for these choices remains unclear. We assessed an algorithm based on Gluteus Medius (GM) deficiency to determine bearing selection. Default choice with no GM damage was a LDH. GM deficiency with posterior muscle intact received DM and CAL for GM complete deficiency with loss of posterior muscle. Consecutive revision THA series followed to determine dislocation, all-cause re-revision and Oxford Hip Score (OHS). 311 revision THA with mean age 70 years (32–95). At a mean follow-up of 4.8 years overall dislocation rate 4.1% (95%CI 2.4–7.0) and survivorship free of re-revision 94.2% (95%CI 96.3–91.0). Outcomes:. Group 1 - LDH (36 & 40mm) n=164 / 4 dislocations / 7 re-revisions. Group 2 - DM n=73 / 3 dislocations / 4 re-revisions. Group 3 - CAL n=58 / 5 dislocations / 7 re-revisions. Group 4 - Other (28 & 32mm) n=16 / 1 dislocation / no re-revisions. Mean pre-op OHS: 19.6 (2–47) and mean post-op OHS: 33.9 (4–48). Kaplan-Meier analysis at 60 months dislocation-free survival was 96.1% (95% CI: 93.0–97.8). There was no difference between survival distributions comparing bearing choice (p=0.46). Decision making tools to guide selection are limited and in addition soft tissue deficiency has been poorly defined. The posterior vertical fibres of GM have the greatest lateral stabiliser effect on the hip. The algorithm we have used clearly defined indication & implant selection. We believe our outcomes support the use of an enhanced stability bearing selection algorithm

Dislocation is one of the most common complications after revision THA using the posterolateral approach. Although the cause of dislocation after revision THA is multifactorial, the historically high dislocation rates have been shown to be significantly reduced by closing the posterior capsule and by the use of large diameter (36 and 40 mm) femoral heads. The relative importance of each of these strategies on the rate of dislocation remains unknown. We undertook a study to determine if increasing femoral head diameter, in addition to posterior capsule closure would influence the dislocation rate following revision THA. We retrospectively reviewed 144 patients who underwent a revision THA. We included all patients who underwent revision THA with closure of the posterior capsule and who had at least a 2-year minimum follow-up. We excluded patients undergoing a revision THA for dislocation or multistage revision for infection since these patients would likely have deficient posterior tissues. Forty-eight patients had a 28 mm femoral head, 47 had a 32 mm head and 49 patients had a 36 mm femoral head. At a minimum follow-up of 2 years, there were 3 dislocations. There were no dislocations in the 28 mm group (0%), 2 in the 32 mm group (4%) and 1 in the 36 mm group (2%). All patients were successfully treated with a closed reduction. No patients had recurrent dislocation. Head size alone was not found to significantly decrease the risk of dislocation (28mm vs 32mm p=0.12; 28mm vs 36mm p=0.27; 32mm vs 36mm p=0.40). Both large diameter heads and careful attention to surgical technique with posterior capsule closure can decrease the historically high dislocation rate after revision THA when utilizing the posterolateral approach. The additional use of a large diameter head did not have a significant impact on the already low dislocation rate. Capsular closure outweighs the effect of femoral head diameter in preventing dislocation following revision THA through a posterolateral approach

Introduction. The majority of primary total hip arthroplasty (THA) procedures performed throughout the world use modular junctions, such as the trunnion-head interface; however, the failure of these press-fit junctions is currently a key issue that may be exacerbated by the use of large diameter heads. Several factors are known to influence the strength of the initial connection, however, the influence of different head sizes has not previously been investigated. The aim of the study was to establish whether the choice of head size influences the initial strength of the trunnion-head connection. Methods. Ti-6Al-4V trunnions (n = 60) and two different sizes of Co-Cr heads (28 mm and 36 mm) were used in the study. Three different levels of assembly force were considered; 4, 5 and 6 kN (n = 10 each). The strength of the press-fit connection was subsequently evaluated by measuring the pull-off force required to break the connection. Finite element and analytical models were also developed to better understand the mechanics of the problem. Results. We report that 36 mm diameter heads had significantly lower pull-off forces when impacted at 4 and 5 kN (p < 0.001; p < 0.001) but not at 6 kN (p = 0.21) compared to 28 mm heads. Mean pull-off forces at 4 and 5 kN impaction forces were 20% lower for 36 mm heads compared to 28 mm heads. Discussion. This is the first study to demonstrate that the head-trunnion connection strength of larger diameter heads is compromised at the point of assembly. Our finite element and analytical models show that the differences in pull-off strength can be explained by differences in structural rigidity and the resulting interface pressures. It should be noted that this effect is likely to be even more pronounced for head diameters larger than 36 mm. Conclusion. We recommend that surgeons use 20% larger impaction forces for 36 mm heads than they would ordinarily use for 28 mm heads

To discuss the rationale, selection criteria, indications, and results of using large diameter ceramic heads in revision hip arthroplasty. We routinely use Biolox family of ceramic heads and acetabular liners in patients undergoing revision total hip replacements. We present our experience in using ceramic articular bearings over the last 20 years and the switch to larger diameter ceramic heads. We also present our rationale for using a large diameter ceramic head instead of a large metal head. We reviewed a total of 689 revision arthroplasties over this time period and we report the outcome of large bearing couples with case examples in primary and revision scenarios. Furthermore we compared a subset of patients (110) with large diameter ceramic heads – Biolox Delta 36mm to patients who had metal on metal (large head 42 mm and above) bearing couples. The performance of the ceramic bearing couples will be discussed along with the functional outcome of these patients. We found no difference in the functional, clinical sports activities (UCLA and Tegner scores) between patients who had large metal bearing couples and large ceramic couples. Complication rate was less with the ceramic bearing revision arthroplasties, as was patient satisfaction. Ceramic bearing couples have stood the test of time and have demonstrated an excellent long term wear properties. The recent introduction of the large diameter couples proves to be an excellent alternative if not the first choice in young, complex primary and revision case scenarios

Aim: To discuss the rationale, selection criteria, indications, and results of using large diameter ceramic heads in primary and revision hip arthroplasty. Patients and Methods: We routinely use Biolox family of ceramic heads and acetabular liners in patients undergoing total hip replacements. We present our experience in using ceramic articular bearings over the last 20 years and the switch to larger diameter ceramic heads. We also present our rationale for using a large diameter ceramic head instead of a large metal head. Results: We reviewed a total of 1189 arthroplasties over this time period and we report the outcome of large bearing couples with case examples in primary and revision scenarios. Furthermore we compared a subset of patients (110) with large diameter ceramic heads – Biolox Delta 36mm to patients who had metal on metal (large head 42 mm and above) bearing couples. The performance of the ceramic bearing couples will be discussed along with the functional outcome of these patients. We found no difference in the functional, clinical sports activities (UCLA and Tegner scores) between patients who had large metal bearing couples and large ceramic couples. Complication rate was less with the ceramic bearing arthroplasties, as was patient satisfaction. Conclusion: Ceramic bearing couples have stood the test of time and have demonstrated an excellent long term wear properties. The recent introduction of the large diameter couples proves to be an excellent alternative if not the first choice in young, complex primary and revision case scenarios