Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research®

, Volume 470, Issue 2, pp 402–409 | Cite as

Factors Affecting Modular Acetabular Ceramic Liner Insertion: A Biomechanical Analysis

  • James P. McAuley
  • Douglas A. Dennis
  • Justin Grostefon
  • William G. Hamilton
Symposium: Papers Presented at the Annual Meetings of The Hip Society



Ceramic liner fracture is a concern in THA. However, it is unclear what factors influence the risk of facture. To study these factors under controlled conditions, we created a laboratory model to avoid fractures in vitro.


We determined (1) whether misaligned liner insertion, acetabular shell deformation, entrapment of soft tissue within the locking taper area, and damage to the taper during engagement of the ceramic liner on the locking taper influenced fracture at light and medium impaction forces; and (2) whether the number and force of impactions affect the locking taper force between the ceramic liner and acetabular shell and fracture of the ceramic liner.


Impaction and pushout tests were performed with each of five ceramic inserts in titanium shells per test to simulate clinical intraoperative situations of misaligned inserts (Test 1), deformed shells (Test 2), soft tissue within the locking taper area (Test 3), simulated cup taper damage (Test 4), and a combination of misaligned insert, deformed shells, and simulated taper damage to create an overall worst-case condition (Test 5).


Higher pushout forces occurred with increased impact force and an increased number of strikes. Insert fractures only occurred where inserts were misaligned in the shell. No fractures occurred with deformed shells, soft tissue in the taper, or with simulated taper damage in the absence of misaligned inserts.


The data suggest a misaligned ceramic insert in an acetabular increases the potential for insert fracture. Shell deformation, soft tissue in the taper, or simulated taper damage seemed well tolerated even with very forceful impaction. Forceful and repetitive impaction is favorable for engagement of the taper and improving pullout strength.


  1. 1.
    Allain J, Roudot-Thoraval F, Delecrin J, Anract P, Migaud H, Goutallier D. Revision total hip arthroplasty performed after fracture of a ceramic femoral head. A multicenter survivorship study. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2003;85:825–830.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bizot P, Nizard R, Hamadouche M, Hannouche D, Sedel L. Prevention of wear and osteolysis: alumina-on-alumina bearing. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2001;393:85–93.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Boutin P. [Total arthroplasty of the hip by fritted aluminum prosthesis. Experimental study and 1st clinical applications] [in French]. Rev Chir Orthop Reparatrice Appar Mot. 1972;58:229–246.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    D’Antonio J, Capello W, Manley M, Naughton M, Sutton K. Alumina ceramic bearings for total hip arthroplasty: five-year results of a prospective randomized study. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2005;436:164–171.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Dorlot JM, Christel P, Meunier A. Wear analysis of retrieved alumina heads and sockets of hip prostheses. J Biomed Mater Res. 1989;23:299–310.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Hamadouche M, Boutin P, Daussange J, Bolander ME, Sedel L. Alumina-on-alumina total hip arthroplasty: a minimum 18.5-year follow-up study. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2002;84:69–77.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Hamilton WG, McAuley JP, Dennis DA, Murphy JA, Blumenfeld TJ, Politi J. THA with Delta ceramic on ceramic: results of a multicenter investigational device exemption trial. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2010;468:358–366.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Hannouche D, Hamadouche M, Nizard R, Bizot P, Meunier A, Sedel L. Ceramics in total hip replacement. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2005;430:62–71.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Hannouche D, Nich C, Bizot P, Meunier A, Nizard R, Sedel L. Fractures of ceramic bearings: history and present status. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2003;417:19–26.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Heros R, Willman G. Ceramics in total hip arthroplasty: history, mechanical properties, clinical results, and current manufacturing state of the art. Semin Arthroplasty. 1998;9:114.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Jazrawi LM, Bogner E, Della Valle CJ, Chen FS, Pak KI, Stuchin SA, Frankel VH, Di Cesare PE. Wear rates of ceramic-on-ceramic bearing surfaces in total hip implants: a 12-year follow-up study. J Arthroplasty. 1999;14:781–787.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Langdown AJ, Pickard RJ, Hobbs CM, Clarke HJ, Dalton DJ, Grover ML. Incomplete seating of the liner with the Trident acetabular system: a cause for concern? J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2007;89:291–295.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Lusty PJ, Tai CC, Sew-Hoy RP, Walter WL, Walter WK, Zicat BA. Third-generation alumina-on-alumina ceramic bearings in cementless total hip arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2007;89:2676–2683.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Maharaj G, Jamison RD. Intraoperative impact: characterization and laboratory simulation on composite hip prostheses. In: Jamison R, Gilbertson LN, eds. Composite Materials for Implant Applications in the Human Body: Characterization and Testing. Philadelphia, PA, USA: American Society for Testing and Materials; 1993:98–108.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    McCarthy MJ, Halawa M. Lining up the liner: 2 case reports of early ceramic liner fragmentation. J Arthroplasty. 2007;22:1217–1222.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Nizard R, Pourreyron D, Raould A, Hannouche D, Sedel L. Alumina-on-alumina hip arthroplasty in patients younger than 30 years old. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2008;466:317–323.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Petit A, Catelas I, Antoniou J, Zukor DJ, Huk OL. Differential apoptotic response of J774 macrophages to alumina and ultra-high-molecular-weight polyethylene particles. J Orthop Res. 2002;20:9–15.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Poggie RA, Turgeon TR, Coutts RD. Failure analysis of a ceramic bearing acetabular component. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2007;89:367–375.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Ranawat AS, Ranawat CS. The squeaking hip: a cause for concern—agrees. Orthopedics. 2007;30:738, 743.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Sedel L. The Tribology of Hip Replacement. London, England: European Instructional Course Lectures. 1997:22–25.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Sedel L, Simeon J, Meunier A, Villette JM, Launay SM. Prostaglandin E2 level in tissue surrounding aseptic failed total hips. Effects of materials. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 1992;111:255–258.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Tateiwa T, Clarke IC, Williams P, Garino J, Manaka M, Shishido T, Yamamoto K, Imakiire A. Ceramic total hip arthroplasty in the United States: safety and risk issues revisited. Am J Orthop. 2008;37:E26–E31.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Walter A. On the material and the tribology of alumina-alumina couplings for hip joint prostheses. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1992;282:31–46.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Walter WL, O’Toole GC, Walter WK, Ellis A, Zicat BA. Squeaking in ceramic-on-ceramic hips: the importance of acetabular component orientation. J Arthroplasty. 2007;22:496–503.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Willmann G. Ceramics for total hip replacement—what a surgeon should know. Orthopedics. 1998;21:173–177.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Wu C. Grain Size dependence of wear in ceramics. Ceramic Engineering Science Proceedings. 1985;6:995–1011.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Yang CC, Kim RH, Dennis DA. The squeaking hip: a cause for concern-disagrees. Orthopedics. 2007;30:739–742.PubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Association of Bone and Joint Surgeons® 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • James P. McAuley
    • 1
  • Douglas A. Dennis
    • 2
  • Justin Grostefon
    • 3
  • William G. Hamilton
    • 4
  1. 1.London Health Sciences CentreUniversity HospitalLondonCanada
  2. 2.Colorado Joint ReplacementDenverUSA
  3. 3.DePuy Orthopaedics, IncWarsawUSA
  4. 4.Anderson Orthopaedic ClinicAlexandriaUSA

Personalised recommendations