Wednesday, August 31, 2011

Comparison of surgical outcomes and implant wear between ceramic-ceramic and ceramic-polyethylene articulations in total hip arthroplasty.

For those of you who are in the process of discussing the options for the materials used in the hip revision, I found these results interesting.  My only question from this abstract is what is the time duration over which these observations were made?  Worth looking into.
J Arthroplasty. 2011 Sep;26(6 Suppl):72-7. Epub 2011 Jun 15. Amanatullah DF, Landa J, Strauss EJ, Garino JP, Kim SH, Di Cesare PE.

Source

Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, University of California at Davis Medical Center, Sacramento, California.

Abstract

The results of a prospective multicenter trial comparing 357 hips randomized to total hip arthroplasty with either ceramic-ceramic or ceramic-polyethylene couplings are presented. No statistically significant difference in clinical outcomes scores between the ceramic-ceramic and ceramic-polyethylene groups was observed at any time interval. The mean linear rate was statistically lower (P < .001) in the ceramic-ceramic group (30.5 μm/year) when compared with the ceramic-polyethylene group (218.2 μm/year). The rates of ceramic implant fracture (2.6%) and audible component-related noise (3.1%) were statistically higher in the ceramic-ceramic group when compared with the ceramic-polyethylene group (P < .05). Lastly, there was no statistically significant difference in the dislocation or revision rate between the groups at the time of last clinical follow-up.

No comments:

Post a Comment