Acetabular edge-loading was a cause of increased wear rates in metal-on-metal hip arthroplasties, ultimately contributing to their failure. Although such wear patterns have been regularly reported in retrieval analyses, this study aimed to determine their in vivo location and investigate their relationship with acetabular component positioning. 3D CT imaging was combined with a recently validated method of mapping bearing surface wear in retrieved hip implants. The asymmetrical stabilizing fins of Birmingham hip replacements (BHRs) allowed the co-registration of their acetabular wear maps and their computational models, segmented from CT scans. The in vivo location of edge-wear was measured within a standardized coordinate system, defined using the anterior pelvic plane.Aims
Methods
The main advantage of 3D-printed, off-the-shelf acetabular implants is the potential to promote enhanced bony fixation due to their controllable porous structure. In this study we investigated the extent of osseointegration in retrieved 3D-printed acetabular implants. We compared two groups, one made via 3D-printing (n = 7) and the other using conventional techniques (n = 7). We collected implant details, type of surgery and removal technique, patient demographics, and clinical history. Bone integration was assessed by macroscopic visual analysis, followed by sectioning to allow undecalcified histology on eight sections (~200 µm) for each implant. The outcome measures considered were area of bone attachment (%), extent of bone ingrowth (%), bone-implant contact (%), and depth of ingrowth (%), and these were quantified using a line-intercept method.Aims
Methods
The optimum clearance between the bearing surfaces of hip arthroplasties is unknown. Theoretically, to minimize wear, it is understood that clearances must be low enough to maintain optimal contact pressure and fluid film lubrication, while being large enough to allow lubricant recovery and reduce contact patch size. This study aimed to identify the relationship between diametrical clearance and volumetric wear, through the analysis of retrieved components. A total of 81 metal-on-metal Pinnacle hips paired with 12/14 stems were included in this study. Geometrical analysis was performed on each component, using coordinate and roundness measuring machines. The relationship between their as-manufactured diametrical clearance and volumetric wear was investigated. The Mann-Whitney U test and unpaired Aims
Methods
Previous studies have suggested that metal-on-metal (MoM) Pinnacle (DePuy Synthes, Warsaw, Indiana) hip arthroplasties implanted after 2006 exhibit higher failure rates. This was attributed to the production of implants with reduced diametrical clearances between their bearing surfaces, which, it was speculated, were outside manufacturing tolerances. This study aimed to better understand the performance of Pinnacle Systems manufactured before and after this event. A total of 92 retrieved MoM Pinnacle hips were analyzed, of which 45 were implanted before 2007, and 47 from 2007 onwards. The ‘pre-2007’ group contained 45 implants retrieved from 21 male and 24 female patients, with a median age of 61.3 years (interquartile range (IQR) 57.1 to 65.5); the ‘2007 onwards’ group contained 47 implants retrieved from 19 male and 28 female patients, with a median age of 61.8 years (IQR 58.5 to 67.8). The volume of material lost from their bearing and taper surfaces was measured using coordinate and roundness measuring machines. These outcomes were then compared statistically using linear regression models, adjusting for potentially confounding factors.Objectives
Methods
The aim of this study was to compare the design of the generic
OptiStem XTR femoral stem with the established Exeter femoral stem. We obtained five boxed, as manufactured, implants of both designs
at random (ten in total). Two examiners were blinded to the implant
design and independently measured the mass, volume, trunnion surface
topography, trunnion roughness, trunnion cone angle, Caput-Collum-Diaphyseal
(CCD) angle, femoral offset, stem length, neck length, and the width
and roughness of the polished stem shaft using peer-reviewed methods.
We then compared the stems using these parameters.Aims
Materials and Methods
