Polyethylene wear of dual mobility cups: a comparative analysis based on patient-specific finite element modeling.
Dual mobility cup
Highly cross-linked polyethylene
Patient-specific modeling
Polyethylene mobile component
Polyethylene wear
Journal
International orthopaedics
ISSN: 1432-5195
Titre abrégé: Int Orthop
Pays: Germany
ID NLM: 7705431
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
04 2022
04 2022
Historique:
received:
05
10
2021
accepted:
04
01
2022
pubmed:
13
1
2022
medline:
6
4
2022
entrez:
12
1
2022
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Concerns remain about potential increased wear with dual mobility cups related to the multiple articulations involved in this specific design of implant. This finite element analysis study aimed to compare polyethylene (PE) wear between dual mobility cup and conventional acetabular component, and between the use of conventional ultra-high molecular weight PE (UHMWPE) and highly cross-linked PE (XPLE). Patient-specific finite element modeling was developed for 15 patients undergoing primary total hip arthroplasty (THA). Five acetabular components were 3D modeled and compared in THA constructs replicating existing implants: a dual mobility cup with a 22.2-mm-diameter femoral head against UHMWPE or XLPE (DM22PE or DM22XL), a conventional cup with a 22.2-mm-diameter femoral head against UHMWPE (SD22PE) and a conventional cup with a 32-mm-diameter femoral head against UHMWPE or XLPE (SD32PE or SD32XL). DM22PE produced 4.6 times and 5.1 times more volumetric wear than SD32XL and DM22XL (p < 0.0001, Cohen's d = 6.97 and 7.11; respectively). However, even if significant, the differences in volumetric wear between DM22XL and SD32XL as well as between DM22PE and SD22PE or SD32PE were small according to their effect size (p < 0.0001, Cohen's |d|= 0.48 to 0.65) and could be therefore considered as clinically negligible. When using XLPE instead of UHMWPE, dual mobility cup with a 22.2-mm-diameter femoral head produced a similar amount of volumetric wear than conventional acetabular component with a 32-mm-diameter femoral head against XLPE. Therefore, XLPE is advocated in dual mobility cup to improve its wear performance.
Identifiants
pubmed: 35020024
doi: 10.1007/s00264-022-05305-4
pii: 10.1007/s00264-022-05305-4
pmc: PMC8930956
doi:
Substances chimiques
Polyethylene
9002-88-4
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
779-787Informations de copyright
© 2022. The Author(s).
Références
Darrith B, Courtney PM, Della Valle CJ (2018) Outcomes of dual mobility components in total hip arthroplasty: a systematic review of the literature. Bone Joint J 100-B:11–19. https://doi.org/10.1302/0301-620X.100B1.BJJ-2017-0462.R1
doi: 10.1302/0301-620X.100B1.BJJ-2017-0462.R1
pubmed: 29305445
Heckmann N, Weitzman DS, Jaffri H et al (2020) Trends in the use of dual mobility bearings in hip arthroplasty. Bone Joint J 102-B(7_Supple_B):27–32. https://doi.org/10.1302/0301-620X.102B7.BJJ-2019-1669.R1
doi: 10.1302/0301-620X.102B7.BJJ-2019-1669.R1
pubmed: 32600197
Laura AD, Hothi H, Battisti C et al (2017) Wear of dual-mobility cups: a review article. Int Orthop 41:625–633. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00264-016-3326-9
doi: 10.1007/s00264-016-3326-9
pubmed: 27942888
Deckard ER, Azzam KA, Meneghini RM (2018) Contemporary dual mobility head penetration at five years: concern for the additional convex bearing surface? J Arthroplasty 33:S280–S284. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arth.2018.02.061
doi: 10.1016/j.arth.2018.02.061
pubmed: 29602536
Vielpeau C, Lebel B, Ardouin L et al (2011) The dual mobility socket concept: experience with 668 cases. Int Orthop 35:225–230. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00264-010-1156-8
doi: 10.1007/s00264-010-1156-8
pubmed: 21184223
Loving L, Herrera L, Banerjee S et al (2015) Dual mobility bearings withstand loading from steeper cup-inclinations without substantial wear. J Orthop Res 33:398–404. https://doi.org/10.1002/jor.22774
doi: 10.1002/jor.22774
pubmed: 25421305
Loving L, Lee RK, Herrera L et al (2013) Wear performance evaluation of a contemporary dual mobility hip bearing using multiple hip simulator testing conditions. J Arthroplasty 28:1041–1046. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arth.2012.09.011
doi: 10.1016/j.arth.2012.09.011
pubmed: 23434106
Saikko V, Shen M (2010) Wear comparison between a dual mobility total hip prosthesis and a typical modular design using a hip joint simulator. Wear 268:617–621. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wear.2009.10.011
doi: 10.1016/j.wear.2009.10.011
D’Apuzzo MR, Koch CN, Esposito CI et al (2016) Assessment of damage on a dual mobility acetabular system. J Arthroplasty 31:1828–1835. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arth.2016.01.039
doi: 10.1016/j.arth.2016.01.039
pubmed: 26897488
pmcid: 6345163
Adam P, Farizon F, Fessy MH (2014) Dual mobility retentive acetabular liners and wear: surface analysis of 40 retrieved polyethylene implants. Orthop Traumatol Surg Res 100:85–91. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.otsr.2013.12.011
doi: 10.1016/j.otsr.2013.12.011
pubmed: 24447655
Geringer J, Boyer B, Farizon F (2011) Understanding the dual mobility concept for total hip arthroplasty. Investigations on a multiscale analysis-highlighting the role of arthrofibrosis. Wear 271:2379–2385. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wear.2011.02.027
doi: 10.1016/j.wear.2011.02.027
Terrier A, Levrero Florencio F, Rüdiger HA (2014) Benefit of cup medialization in total hip arthroplasty is associated with femoral anatomy. Clin Orthop Relat Res 472:3159–3165. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11999-014-3787-3
doi: 10.1007/s11999-014-3787-3
pubmed: 25030101
pmcid: 4160515
Rüdiger HA, Parvex V, Terrier A (2016) Impact of the femoral head position on moment arms in total hip arthroplasty: a parametric finite element study. J Arthroplasty 31:715–720. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arth.2015.09.044
doi: 10.1016/j.arth.2015.09.044
pubmed: 26507523
Rüdiger HA, Guillemin M, Latypova A, Terrier A (2017) Effect of changes of femoral offset on abductor and joint reaction forces in total hip arthroplasty. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 137:1579–1585. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00402-017-2788-6
doi: 10.1007/s00402-017-2788-6
pubmed: 28905107
Delp SL, Loan JP, Hoy MG et al (1990) An interactive graphics-based model of the lower extremity to study orthopaedic surgical procedures. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng 37:757–767. https://doi.org/10.1109/10.102791
doi: 10.1109/10.102791
pubmed: 2210784
Terrier A, Latypova A, Guillemin M et al (2017) Dual mobility cups provide biomechanical advantages in situations at risk for dislocation: a finite element analysis. Int Orthop 41:551–556. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00264-016-3368-z
doi: 10.1007/s00264-016-3368-z
pubmed: 28070611
Teoh SH, Chan WH, Thampuran R (2002) An elasto-plastic finite element model for polyethylene wear in total hip arthroplasty. J Biomech 35:323–330. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0021-9290(01)00215-9
doi: 10.1016/s0021-9290(01)00215-9
pubmed: 11858807
Pruitt LA (2005) Deformation, yielding, fracture and fatigue behavior of conventional and highly cross-linked ultra high molecular weight polyethylene. Biomaterials 26:905–915. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biomaterials.2004.03.022
doi: 10.1016/j.biomaterials.2004.03.022
pubmed: 15353202
Saikko VO (1996) A three-axis hip joint simulator for wear and friction studies on total hip prostheses. Proc Inst Mech Eng H 210:175–185. https://doi.org/10.1243/PIME_PROC_1996_210_410_02
doi: 10.1243/PIME_PROC_1996_210_410_02
pubmed: 8885654
Archard JF, Hirst W (1956) The wear of metals under unlubricated conditions. Proc R Soc Lond A 236:397–410. https://doi.org/10.1098/rspa.1956.0144
doi: 10.1098/rspa.1956.0144
Maxian TA, Brown TD, Pedersen DR, Callaghan JJ (1996) Adaptive finite element modeling of long-term polyethylene wear in total hip arthroplasty. J Orthop Res 14:668–675. https://doi.org/10.1002/jor.1100140424
doi: 10.1002/jor.1100140424
pubmed: 8764879
Dumbleton JH, Wang A, Sutton K, Manley MT (2009) Chapter 14—Highly crosslinked and annealed UHMWPE. In: Kurtz SM, editor. UHMWPE biomaterials handbook (second edition), Academic Press, pp 205–219. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-374721-1.00014-6
Schmalzried TP, Szuszczewicz ES, Northfield MR et al (1998) Quantitative assessment of walking activity after total hip or knee replacement. J Bone Joint Surg Am 80:54–59
doi: 10.2106/00004623-199801000-00010
Affatato S, Spinelli M, Zavalloni M et al (2008) Tribology and total hip joint replacement: current concepts in mechanical simulation. Med Eng Phys 30:1305–1317. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.medengphy.2008.07.006
doi: 10.1016/j.medengphy.2008.07.006
pubmed: 18774742
Combes A, Migaud H, Girard J et al (2013) Low rate of dislocation of dual-mobility cups in primary total hip arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res 471:3891–3900. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11999-013-2929-3
doi: 10.1007/s11999-013-2929-3
pubmed: 23516032
pmcid: 3825881
Boyer B, Philippot R, Geringer J, Farizon F (2012) Primary total hip arthroplasty with dual mobility socket to prevent dislocation: a 22-year follow-up of 240 hips. Int Orthop 36:511–518. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00264-011-1289-4
doi: 10.1007/s00264-011-1289-4
pubmed: 21698430
Epinette JA, Harwin SF, Rowan FE et al (2017) Early experience with dual mobility acetabular systems featuring highly cross-linked polyethylene liners for primary hip arthroplasty in patients under fifty five years of age: an international multi-centre preliminary study. Int Orthop 41:543–550. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00264-016-3367-0
doi: 10.1007/s00264-016-3367-0
pubmed: 28013332
Sychterz CJ, Engh CA Jr, Young AM et al (2000) Comparison of in vivo wear between polyethylene liners articulating with ceramic and cobalt-chrome femoral heads. J Bone Joint Surg Br 82:948–951. https://doi.org/10.1302/0301-620x.82b7.9885
doi: 10.1302/0301-620x.82b7.9885
pubmed: 11041580
Boyer B, Neri T, Di Iorio A et al (2017) The linear penetration rate is not relevant for evaluating wear of dual mobility cups: an explant study. Int Orthop 41:599–603. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00264-017-3406-5
doi: 10.1007/s00264-017-3406-5
pubmed: 28124104
Laende EK, Richardson CG, Dunbar MJ (2020) Migration and wear of a dual mobility acetabular construct at 3 years measured by radiostereometric analysis. J Arthroplasty 35:1109–1116. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arth.2019.11.010
doi: 10.1016/j.arth.2019.11.010
pubmed: 31866254
Dumbleton JH, Manley MT, Edidin AA (2002) A literature review of the association between wear rate and osteolysis in total hip arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 17:649–661. https://doi.org/10.1054/arth.2002.33664
doi: 10.1054/arth.2002.33664
pubmed: 12168184
Callary SA, Solomon LB, Holubowycz OT et al (2015) Wear of highly crosslinked polyethylene acetabular components. Acta Orthop 86:159–168. https://doi.org/10.3109/17453674.2014.972890
doi: 10.3109/17453674.2014.972890
pubmed: 25301435
pmcid: 4404765
Kang L, Galvin AL, Brown TD, Jin Z, Fisher J (2008) Quantification of the effect of cross-shear on the wear of conventional and highly cross-linked UHMWPE. J Biomech 41:340–346. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbiomech.2007.09.005
doi: 10.1016/j.jbiomech.2007.09.005
pubmed: 17936763
Saikko V (2006) Effect of contact pressure on wear and friction of ultra-high molecular weight polyethylene in multidirectional sliding. Proc Inst Mech Eng H 220:723–731. https://doi.org/10.1243/09544119JEIM146
doi: 10.1243/09544119JEIM146
pubmed: 17117762