The aim of this study was to evaluate the surface damage, the density of crosslinking, and oxidation in retrieved antioxidant-stabilized highly crosslinked polyethylene (A-XLPE) tibial inserts from total knee arthroplasty (TKA), and to compare the results with a matched cohort of standard remelted highly crosslinked polyethylene (XLPE) inserts. A total of 19 A-XLPE tibial inserts were retrieved during revision TKA and matched to 18 retrieved XLPE inserts according to the demographics of the patients, with a mean length of implantation of 15 months (1 to 42). The percentage areas of PE damage on the articular surfaces and the modes of damage were measured. The density of crosslinking of the PE and oxidation were measured at loaded and unloaded regions on these surfaces.Aims
Materials and Methods
Large femoral heads have been used with increasing
frequency over the last decade. The prime reason is likely the effect
of large heads on stability. The larger head neck ratio, combined
with the increased jump distance of larger heads result in a greater
arc of impingement free motion, and greater resistance to dislocation
in a provocative position. Multiple studies have demonstrated clear
clinical efficacy in diminishing dislocation rates with the use
of large femoral heads. With crosslinked polyethylene, wear has
been shown to be equivalent between larger and smaller heads. However,
the stability advantages of increasing diameter beyond 38 mm have
not been clearly demonstrated. More importantly, recent data implicates
large heads in the increasing prevalence of groin pain and psoas impingement.
There are clear benefits with larger femoral head diameters, but
the advantages of diameters beyond 38 mm have not yet been demonstrated
clinically.
We reviewed the literature on the currently available
choices of bearing surface in total hip replacement (THR). We present
a detailed description of the properties of articulating surfaces
review the understanding of the advantages and disadvantages of
existing bearing couples. Recent technological developments in the
field of polyethylene and ceramics have altered the risk of fracture
and the rate of wear, although the use of metal-on-metal bearings has
largely fallen out of favour, owing to concerns about reactions
to metal debris. As expected, all bearing surface combinations have
advantages and disadvantages. A patient-based approach is recommended,
balancing the risks of different options against an individual’s
functional demands. Cite this article:
