Purpose: A ceramic head coupled to a metal liner is a proposed new alternate bearing in THA. The authors participated in an FDA approved multicentre prospective, randomized, blinded clinical trial comparing ceramic-on-metal (CoM) to metal-on-metal (MoM) in patients receiving a THA.

Method: 390 patients received the same acetabular component and metal insert. 194 patients received a delta ceramic head (CoM) and 196 received a metal head (MoM). Metal ions were evaluated in 72 patients (36-CoM, 36-MoM). Harris Hip scores, radiographs, and metal ion levels (cobalt, chromium and titanium in serum, erythrocytes and urine) were evaluated pre-operatively and at three, 12 and 24 months.

Results: No patients were lost to follow-up. There were no differences between groups’ baseline demographics and clinical scores. At two years there were no differences in Harris Hip scores, radiographs, adverse events or postoperative complications. Both groups had overall very low median metal ion profiles with no statistically significant differences. 24 month MoM vs CoM; Serum cobalt ( g/L), mean: 1.2(+/−0.5) vs 1.1(+/−0.3), median: 0.66(range: 0.2–5.6) vs 1.0 (range: 0.3–2.7); Serum chromium ( g/L), mean: 1.1(+/−0.5) vs 1.4(+/−0.4), median: 0.86(range: 0.3–6.9) vs 1.2(range: 0.3–4.9). Urine cobalt and urine chromium ( g/day) demonstrated similar trends to serum ion levels.

Conclusion: While CoM is a new bearing surface in North America and not currently FDA or HPB approved, it has been in clinical use globally since 2006. Results of this non-inferiority RCT demonstrated no clinical outcome, metal ion, radiographic or adverse event differences between CoM and MoM cohorts.

Purpose: Metal-on-metal articulations are an increasingly popular choice as an alternate bearing surface in total hip arthroplasty (THA) and Resurfacing implants. One advantage of a metal-on-metal bearing is the use of larger diameter femoral heads with hip simulator data demonstrating reduced wear. We performed a prospective, multicentre, randomized, blinded clinical trial comparing 28mm to 36mm metal-on-metal bearings assessing multiple validated outcome measures and serum, erythrocyte and urine metal ions.

Method: Ninety-one patients were randomized to receive a metal-on-polyethylene (34), a 28mm metal-on-metal (25) or a 36mm metal-on-metal (32) insert. All patients received the same acetabular and femoral component. Patients were evaluated pre-operatively, at 6, 12 months and annually thereafter, including an evaluation of serum, erythrocyte and urine cobalt, chromium, and titanium, outcome measures (WOMAC, SF-12, Harris Hip Score) and radiographs.

Results: At a minimum two years follow-up there were no differences in WOMAC, SF-12, Harris Hip scores or radiographs. Patients receiving metal liners had significantly (p< 0.001) elevated metal ion measurements compared with the polyethylene control group, however there were no differences between the 28mm and 36mm metal-on-metal bearings (Median serum Co (mg/L): 0.14(poly), 0.77(28mm), 0.73(36mm). Median erythrocyte Co (mg/L): 0.11(poly), 0.42(28mm), 0.42(36mm). Median urine Co(mg/day): 0.44(poly), 4.55(28mm), 5.42(36mm)). (Median serum Cr(mg/L): 0.17(poly), 1.29(28mm), 0.91(36mm). Median erythrocyte Cr(mg/ L): 1.10(poly), 1.10(28mm), 1.20(36mm). Median urine Cr(mg/day): 0.27(poly), 1.92(28mm), 2.02(36mm)).

Conclusion: Both cobalt and chromium ion measurements were significantly elevated in the blood and urine of the patients randomized to receive the metal-on-metal bearings at all time intervals. There were no differences seen between the 28mm and 36mm metal-on-metal bearings, keeping all other variables identical. The larger diameter bearing therefore provides the potential clinical advantages of improved range of motion and stability, while providing a similar metal ion profile. While reduced wear is seen with larger diameter metal-on-metal bearings in-vitro, we could not demonstrate a reduction in blood or urine metal ion levels in-vivo.