The incidence of noise generation arising from the large-diameter Delta Motion ceramic total hip bearing.

Nuffield Orthopaedic Centre, Oxford, Windmill Road, Headington, Oxford OX3 7LD, UK.
Bone & joint journal 02/2013; 95-B(2):160-5. DOI: 10.1302/0301-620X.95B2.30450
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Noise generation has been reported with ceramic-on-ceramic articulations in total hip replacement (THR). This study evaluated 208 consecutive Delta Motion THRs at a mean follow-up of 21 months (12 to 35). There were 141 women and 67 men with a mean age of 59 years (22 to 84). Patients were reviewed clinically and radiologically, and the incidence of noise was determined using a newly described assessment method. Noise production was examined against range of movement, ligamentous laxity, patient-reported outcome scores, activity level and orientation of the acetabular component. There were 143 silent hips (69%), 22 (11%) with noises other than squeaking, 17 (8%) with unreproducible squeaking and 26 (13%) with reproducible squeaking. Hips with reproducible squeaking had a greater mean range of movement (p < 0.001) and mean ligament laxity (p = 0.004), smaller median head size (p = 0.01) and decreased mean acetabular component inclination (p = 0.02) and anteversion angle (p = 0.02) compared with the other groups. There was no relationship between squeaking and age (p = 0.13), height (p = 0.263), weight (p = 0.333), body mass index (p = 0.643), gender (p = 0.07) or patient outcome score (p = 0.422). There were no revisions during follow-up. Despite the surprisingly high incidence of squeaking, all patients remain satisfied with their hip replacement. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2013;95-B:160-5.

  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The configuration of total hip arthroplasty (THA) implants has constantly evolved since they were first introduced. One of the key components of THA design is the diameter of the prosthetic femoral head. It has been well established that the risk of dislocation is lower as the head diameter increases. But head diameter impacts other variables beyond joint stability: wear, cam-type impingement, range of motion, restoration of biomechanics, proprioception and groin pain. The introduction of highly cross-linked polyethylene and hard-on-hard bearings has allowed surgeons to implant large-diameter heads that almost completely eliminate the risk of dislocation. But as a result, cup liners have become thinner. With femoral head diameters up to 36 mm, the improvement in joint range of motion, delay in cam-type impingement and reduction in dislocation risk have been clearly demonstrated. Conversely, large-diameter heads do not provide any additional improvements. If an “ecologically sound” approach to hip replacement is embraced (e.g. keeping the native femoral head diameter), hip resurfacing with a metal-on-metal bearing must be carried out. The reliability of large-diameter femoral heads in the longer term is questionable. Large-diameter ceramic-on-ceramic bearings may be plagued by the same problems as metal-on-metal bearings: groin pain, squeaking, increased stiffness, irregular lubrication, acetabular loosening and notable friction at the Morse taper. These possibilities require us to be extra careful when using femoral heads with a diameter greater than 36 mm.
    Orthopaedics & Traumatology Surgery & Research 01/2015; 101(1). · 1.17 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The effect of body weight on the success of arthroplasty replacement of the hip joint is a controversial issue, particularly the question of whether the choice of bearing couple used should be adapted to individual patient characteristics. As part of this study, we carried out a literature-based meta-analysis of clinical results which referred to patient weight. The friction of various material combinations under different joint forces was also experimentally determined. Clinically, there are reports of unfavorable implant positioning, increased rate of dislocations and increased noise developments for obese patients. The results of the friction measurements do not suggest a material choice adapted to body weight. For obese patients, therefore, the same argument applies as for patients with normal weight: provided a correct implantation situation can be ensured, ceramic-on-ceramic bearing couples should be favored from a tribological point of view. If the correct implant position—for example, based on the more complicated implant conditions in obese patients—cannot be achieved, a hard-soft bearing couple with a ceramic head appears to be preferable to a hard-hard bearing couple.
    Seminars in Arthroplasty 01/2014;
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Large femoral heads have become popular in total hip replacement (THR) as a method of reducing the risk of dislocation. However, if large heads are used in ceramic-on-ceramic THR, the liner must be thinner, which may increase the risk of fracture. To compare the rates of ceramic fracture and dislocation between 28 mm and 32 mm ceramic heads, 120 hips in 109 patients (51 men and 58 women, mean age 49.2 years) were randomised to THR with either a 28 mm or a 32 mm ceramic articulation. A total of 57/60 hips assigned to the 28 mm group and 55/60 hips assigned to the 32 mm group were followed for at least five years. No ceramic component fractures occured in any patient in either group. There was one dislocation in the 32 mm group and none in the 28 mm group (p = 0.464). No hip had detectable wear, focal osteolysis or prosthetic loosening. In our small study the 32 mm ceramic articulation appeared to be safe in terms of ceramic liner fracture. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2014;96-B:1459-63.
    The bone & joint journal. 11/2014; 96-B(11):1459-63.