Skip to main content
Log in

Ceramic–ceramic coupling with big heads: clinical outcome

Couple céramique–céramique avec têtes de gros diamètres: résultats cliniques

  • Original Article
  • Published:
European Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery & Traumatology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The wear and the friction torque are proportional to the head diameter in THA. That is the reason why, in the past, according to Charnley’s “low friction arthroplasty”, the head diameter was as small as possible employing metal–polyethylene coupling. On the contrary with ceramic–ceramic, the head diameter raise does not increase in a considerable way neither the wear rate nor the friction torque. A bigger diameter head leads to a more stable artificial joint and to a wider range of motion. An acetabular component with a 36 mm liner-head ceramic–ceramic coupling has been developed and implanted since 2001. We performed a prospective study to investigate the dislocation rate of this new prosthesis in the first 2 years after the operation. We matched two groups of patients, comparable in diagnosis and age: the first one (370 cases, from March 2001 to March 2004) in which 36 mm heads were implanted, and the second one (223 cases, from January 2001 to March 2004) in which 28 mm heads were used. The surgical technique (postero–lateral approach), the surgeons and the stems (cemented and uncemented) were the same. We compared the number of dislocations in the two groups. There were four dislocations (1.08%) in the first group and 10 (4.48%) in the second. The data confirmed that there was a statistically significant (P = 0.011) decrease of the dislocations in the group of 36 mm heads. Moreover, we are able now to evaluate the recurrent dislocations that needed a revision: one in the group of 36 mm head (0.27%) and three in the group of 28 mm (1.34%), confirming the lower rate in the bigger heads.

Résumé

L’usure et la friction sont proportionnelles au diamètre de la tête dans les arthroplasties totales de hanche. C’est la raison pour laquelle dans le passé, selon le principe de « low friction arthroplasty » de Charnley, le diamètre de la tête utilisée était le plus petit possible pour les couples métal-polyéthylène. Au contraire, avec le couple céramique-céramique l’augmentation du diamètre de la tête n’influence pas considérablement ni le taux d’usure ni la friction. Une tête de plus gros diamètre permet de créer une articulation plus stable avec une amplitude de mouvement plus grande. Une cupule recevant un couple céramique-céramique (insert-tête) de 36 mm a été développée puis implantée depuis l’année 2001. Nous avons effectué une étude prospective pour analyser le taux de luxation de ce nouvel implant durant les deux premières années post-opératoires. Nous avons confronté deux groupes de patients comparables en terme de diagnostique et d’âge: le premier (370 cas de Mars 2001 à Mars 2004) pour lequel des têtes de 36 mm ont été implantées et le second (223 cas, de Janvier 2001 à Janvier 2004) pour lequel des têtes de 28 mm ont été utilisées. La technique chirurgicale (voie d’abord postéro-latérale), les chirurgiens et les tiges fémorales (cimentées et sans ciment) étaient les mêmes. Nous avons comparé les taux de luxation dans les deux groupes. Il y a eu 4 luxations (1,08%) dans le premier groupe et 10 (4,48%) dans le second. Les chiffres confirment qu’il y a une diminution statistiquement significative (P = 0.011) du taux de luxation dans le groupe avec têtes de 36 mm. De plus, nous sommes capables maintenant d’évaluer le taux des luxations itératives qui nécessitent une révision : 1 cas dans le groupe des têtes de 36 mm (0.27%) et 3 dans le groupe des têtes de 28 mm (1.34%), confirmant le taux plus faible pour les plus grosses têtes.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Bartz RL, Nobel PC, Kadakia NR, Tullos HS (2000) The effect of femoral component head and acetabular size to the prevalence of dislocation. J Bone J Surg Am 82:1300–1307

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Bohler M, Knahr K, Plank H, Walter A, Salzer N, Schiriber V (1994) Long term results of uncemented alumina acetabular implants. J Bone J Surg Br 76:53–59

    Google Scholar 

  3. Burroughs BR, Rubash HE, Harris WH (2002) Femoral head sizes larger than 32 mm against highly cross-linked polyethylene. Clin Orthop 405:150–157

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Charnley J (1979) Low friction arthroplasty of the hip. Springer, Heidelberg

    Google Scholar 

  5. Cinotti G, Benedetti Valentini M, Benedetti Valentini F (2003) Mobilità articolare e rischio di lussazione nell’artroprotesi d’anca. Influenza dell’orientamento dell’impianto e del diametro della testina. G.I.O.T 29(Suppl 2):S553–S557

    Google Scholar 

  6. Fritsch EW, Gleitz M (1996) Ceramic femoral head fractures in total hip arthroplasty. Clin Orthop 328:129–136

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Garcia-Cimbrelo E, Sayanes JM Minuesa (1996) Ceramic–ceramic prosthesis after 10 years. J Arthroplasty 11:773–781

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Giacometti Ceroni R, Dalla Pria P (2001) The development of large ceramic heads to obtain more stable THA with wider range of motion. Bioceramics in joint arthroplasty. Georg Thieme Vergal, Stuttgart, pp 11–12

    Google Scholar 

  9. Gualtieri G, Nigrisoli M, Dallari D, Catamo L, Gualtieri I (1993) A study of the mechanical and biological behaviour of bioceramic hip arthroplasty followed up after more than 10 years. Chir Organi Mov 78:213–222

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Hedlundh U, Ahnfelt L, Hybbinette CH, Wallinder L, Weckstrom J, Fredin H (1996) Dislocations and femoral head size in primary total hip arthroplasty. Clin Orthop 333:226–233

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Kelley SS, Lachiewicz PF, Hickman JM, Paterno SM (1998) Relationship of femoral head and acetabular size to the prevalence of dislocation. Clin Orthop 335:163–170

    Google Scholar 

  12. Khan MA, Brakenbury PH, Reynolds ISR (1982) Dislocation following total hip replacement. J Bone J Surg Br 63:214–218

    Google Scholar 

  13. Lerouge S, Huk O, Yahia L, Witvoet J, Sedel L (1997) Ceramic–ceramic and polyethylene total hip replacement: comparison of pseudomembranes after loosening. J Bone J Surg Br 79:135–139

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Mittelmeier H (2003) Ceramics used for component configurations in THR. Orthopadische Praxis 10:599–608

    Google Scholar 

  15. Nessutt R, Wimmer MA, Schneider E, Morlock MM (2003) The influence of resting periods on friction in the artificial hip. Clin Orthop 407:127–138

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Sedel L (2000) Evolution of alumina-on-alumina implants: a review. Clin Orthop 379:48–54

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Toni A, Terzi S, Sudanese A, Bianchi G (2000) Fractures of ceramic components in total hip arthroplasty. Hip Int 10:49–56

    Google Scholar 

  18. Toni A, Sudanese A, Paderni S, Guerra E (2001) Ceramic-on-Ceramic: Long-term clinical experience bioceramics in joint arthroplasty. Georg Thieme Verlag, Stuttgart, pp 2–5

    Google Scholar 

  19. Willmann G (2000) The evolution of ceramics in total hip replacement. Hip Int 10:193–203

    Google Scholar 

  20. Yamaguchi M, Akisue T, Bauer TW, Hashimoto Y (2000) The spatial location of impingement in total hip arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 15:305–313

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Yuan L, Shih C (1999) Dislocation after total hip arthroplasty. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 119:263–266

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Zagra L, Marciano E, Giacometti Ceroni R (2002) Alumina-on-alumina coupling with 36 mm heads. Hip Int 12:200

    Google Scholar 

  23. Zagra L, Giacometti Ceroni R (2003) Ceramica–ceramica con teste di diametro 36 mm: valutazione clinica della stabilità articolare. G.I.O.T 29(Suppl 2):S564–S568

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Luigi Zagra.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Zagra, L., Giacometti Ceroni, R. Ceramic–ceramic coupling with big heads: clinical outcome. Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol 17, 247–251 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00590-006-0182-0

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00590-006-0182-0

Keywords

Mots clés

Navigation