The annual wear rates were compared and intra-observer variability was calculated as the difference between both measurements (precision). The average time it takes to measure one image (without format conversions) was documented and practicality of daily clinical use was evaluated.
The precision was (mean +/− SD): Martell = 1.74+/−1.53, Hyperview = 0.36 +/−0.92, Pro-X = 0.10+/−0.11 Roman = 0.08 +/−0.08. The average measuring time per image was: Martell = 94s, Hyperview = 94s, Pro-X = 92s Roman = 158s.
This study confirms that the Vancouver classification and the modified algorithm for the management of PPF are a simple,reproducible classification system also for the uncemented treatment modality. Conservative treatment is a valid option in case of a stable implant, while in case of a loose implant surgical intervention is mandatory.
For the ABG-I cup the literature review gave survival rates between 59%–97% after 8–10 years. In our own study cup survival was 97.4% at 10 years. Looking at PE-wear, the literature gave average wear rates ranging from 0.24 to 0.32mm/year, values clearly above the wear rate boundary of 0.10–0.15mm/year usually considered as critical. In our own study augmented PE-wear (>
0.15mm/year) was noted in 23.6% of all implants. The majority (77%) of these implants were from patients younger than 70 years although this group only represented 57% of the total. The revision rates at 10 years reflect a similar trend with values much higher for patients below 70 years (2.8%) than above(4.9%).