Aims. The use of vitamin E-infused highly crosslinked polyethylene (HXLPE) in total knee prostheses is controversial. In this paper we have compared the clinical and radiological results between conventional polyethylene and vitamin E-infused HXLPE inserts in total knee arthroplasty (TKA). Patients and Methods. The study included 200 knees (175 patients) that underwent TKA using the same total knee prostheses. In all, 100 knees (77 patients) had a vitamin E-infused HXLPE insert (study group) and 100 knees (98 patients) had a conventional polyethylene insert (control group). There were no significant differences in age, sex, diagnosis, preoperative knee range of movement (ROM), and preoperative Knee Society Score (KSS) between the two groups. Clinical and radiological results were evaluated at two years postoperatively. Results. Differences in postoperative ROM and KSS were not statistically significant between the study and control groups. No knee exhibited osteolysis, aseptic loosening, or polyethylene failure. Additionally, there was no significant difference in the incidence of a radiolucent line between the two groups. One patient from the study group required irrigation and debridement, due to deep infection, at six months postoperatively. Conclusion. Clinical results were comparable between vitamin E-infused HXLPE inserts and conventional polyethylene inserts at two years after TKA, without any significant clinical failure. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2019;101-B:559–564

Aims. The aim of this study was to compare the migration of the femoral component, five years postoperatively, between patients with a highly cross-linked polyethylene (HXLPE) insert and those with a conventional polyethylene (PE) insert in an uncemented Triathlon fixed insert cruciate-retaining total knee arthroplasty (TKA). Secondary aims included clinical outcomes and patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs). We have previously reported the migration and outcome of the tibial components in these patients. Methods. A double-blinded randomized controlled trial was conducted including 96 TKAs. The migration of the femoral component was measured with radiostereometry (RSA) at three and six months and one, two, and five years postoperatively. PROMs were collected preoperatively and at all periods of follow-up. Results. There was no clinically relevant difference in terms of migration of the femoral component or PROMs between the HXLPE and PE groups. The mean difference in migration (maximum total point motion), five years postopeatively, was 0.04 mm (95% CI -0.06 to 0.16) in favour of the PE group. Conclusion. There was no clinically relevant difference in migration of the femoral component, for up to five years between the two groups. These findings will help to establish a benchmark for future studies on migration of femoral components in TKA. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2024;106-B(8):826–833

Aims. The primary objective of this study was to compare the five-year tibial component migration and wear between highly crosslinked polyethylene (HXLPE) inserts and conventional polyethylene (PE) inserts of the uncemented Triathlon fixed insert cruciate-retaining total knee arthroplasty (TKA). Secondary objectives included clinical outcomes and patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs). Methods. A double-blinded, randomized study was conducted including 96 TKAs. Tibial component migration and insert wear were measured with radiostereometric analysis (RSA) at three, six, 12, 24, and 60 months postoperatively. PROMS were collected preoperatively and at all follow-up timepoints. Results. There was no clinically relevant difference in terms of tibial component migration, insert wear, and PROMs between the HXLPE and PE groups. The mean difference in tibial component migration (maximal total point migration (MTPM)) was 0.02 mm (95% confidence interval (CI) -0.07 to 0.11), which is below the value of 0.2 mm considered to be clinically relevant. Wear after five years for HXLPE was 0.16 mm (95% CI 0.05 to 0.27), and for PE was 0.23 mm (95% CI 0.12 to 0.35). The mean difference in wear rate was 0.01 mm/year (95% CI -0.02 to 0.05) in favour of the HXLPE group. Wear is mainly present on the medial side of the insert. Conclusion. There is no clinically relevant difference in tibial component migration and insert wear for up to five years between the HXLPE conventional PE inserts. For the implant studied, the potential advantages of a HXLPE insert remain to be proven under clinical conditions at longer-term follow-up. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2023;105-B(5):518–525

Aims. Vitamin E-infused highly cross-linked polyethylene (E1) has recently been introduced in total knee arthroplasty (TKA). An in vitro wear simulator study showed that E1 reduced polyethylene wear. However there is no published information regarding in vivo wear. Previous reports suggest that newly introduced materials which reduce in vitro polyethylene wear do not necessarily reduce in vivo polyethylene wear. To assist in the evaluation of the newly introduced material before widespread use, we established an in vivo polyethylene wear particle analysis for TKA. The aim of this study was to compare in vivo polyethylene wear particle generation between E1 and conventional polyethylene (ArCom) in TKA. Methods. A total of 34 knees undergoing TKA (17 each with ArCom or E1) were investigated. Except for the polyethylene insert material, the prostheses used for both groups were identical. Synovial fluid was obtained at a mean of 3.4 years (SD 1.3) postoperatively. The in vivo polyethylene wear particles were isolated from the synovial fluid using a previously validated method and examined by scanning electron microscopy. Results. The total number of polyethylene wear particles obtained from the knees with E1 (mean 6.9, SD 4.0 × 10. 7. counts/knee) was greater than that obtained from those with ArCom (mean 2.2, SD 2.6 × 10. 7. counts/knee) (p = 0.001). The particle size (equivalent circle of diameter) from the knees with E1 was smaller (mean 0.5 μm, SD 0.1) than that of knees with ArCom (mean 1.5, SD 0.3 μm) (p = 0.001). The aspect ratio of particles from the knees with E1 (mean 1.3, SD 0.1) was smaller than that with ArCom (mean 1.4, SD 0.1) (p < 0.001 ). Conclusion. This is the first report of in vivo wear particle analysis of E1. E1 polyethylene did not reduce the number of in vivo polyethylene wear particles compared with ArCom in early clinical stage. Further careful follow-up of newly introduced E1 for TKA should be carried out. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2020;102-B(11):1527–1534

Aims

A retrospective study was conducted to measure short-term in vivo linear and volumetric wear of polyethylene (PE) inserts in 101 total knee arthroplasty (TKA) patients using model-based radiostereometric analysis (MBRSA).

The outcome of total knee replacement (TKR) using components designed to increase the range of flexion is not fully understood. The short- to mid-term risk of aseptic revision in high flexion TKR was evaluated. The endpoint of the study was aseptic revision and the following variables were investigated: implant design (high flexion vs non-high flexion), the thickness of the tibial insert (≤ 14 mm vs > 14 mm), cruciate ligament (posterior stabilised (PS) vs cruciate retaining), mobility (fixed vs rotating), and the manufacturer (Zimmer, Smith & Nephew and DePuy). Covariates included patient, implant, surgeon and hospital factors. Marginal Cox proportional hazard models were used.

In a cohort of 64 000 TKRs, high flexion components were used in 8035 (12.5%). The high flexion knees with tibial liners of thickness > 14 mm had a density of revision of 1.45/100 years of observation, compared with 0.37/100 in non-high flexion TKR with liners ≤ 14 mm thick. Relative to a standard fixed PS TKR, the NexGen (Zimmer, Warsaw, Indiana) Gender Specific Female high flexion fixed PS TKR had an increased risk of revision (hazard ratio (HR) 2.27 (95% confidence interval (CI) 1.48 to 3.50)), an effect that was magnified when a thicker tibial insert was used (HR 8.10 (95% CI 4.41 to 14.89)).

Surgeons should be cautious when choosing high flexion TKRs, particularly when thicker tibial liners might be required.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2014;96-B:217–23.