Comparaison des taux d’usure et d’ostéolyse des polyéthylènes hautement réticulés entre un recuit de seconde génération et un refondu de première génération : étude cas témoin au recul minimal de 5 ans - 28/03/17

Comparison of wear rate and osteolysis between second-generation annealed and first-generation remelted highly cross-linked polyethylene in total hip arthroplasty. A case control study at a minimum of five years

Doi : 10.1016/j.rcot.2017.03.004

R. Takada, T. Jinno ^⁎ , D. Koga, K. Miyatake, T. Muneta, A. Okawa
Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Medical Hospital, Tokyo Medical and Dental University, 1-5-45 Yushima, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo 113-8519, Japon

^⁎Auteur correspondant.

Sous presse. Épreuves corrigées par l'auteur. Disponible en ligne depuis le Tuesday 28 March 2017
Cet article a été publié dans un numéro de la revue, cliquez ici pour y accéder

Abstract

Background

There is no previous report that directly compared wear resistance of second-generation annealed highly cross-linked polyethylene with that of first-generation remelted highly cross-linked polyethylene. We therefore performed a retrospective study at a minimum of 5-year follow-up comparing second-generation annealed and first-generation remelted highly cross-linked polyethylene in order to: (1) assess wear rates and (2) compare the incidence of osteolysis between, (3) identify the frequency of complication related to the two types of highly cross-linked polyethylene.

Hypothesis

There is a difference in the linear wear rate and the incidence of osteolysis between the two types of highly cross-linked polyethylene in total hip arthroplasty.

Materials and methods

In a single center study, we reviewed 123 primary cementless total hip arthroplasties between 2010 and 2011 that were performed with 32mm alumina ceramic on second-generation annealed (X3) or first-generation remelted (longevity) highly cross-linked polyethylene liner. There was no specific reason for the choice of the type of highly cross-linked polyethylene. There were no significant differences between the two groups in respect of gender, diagnosis, body mass index, pre- and postoperative functional and activity score, cup size, and cup orientation except the younger age in the X3 group. The mean wear rate and the incidence of osteolysis were evaluated at the latest follow-up.

Results

One hundred and nine cases followed over 5 years postoperatively (88.6% in all consecutive cases) were evaluated. X3 and longevity were used in 54 and 55 cases, respectively. The mean follow-up was 5.3 years in both groups. The mean linear wear rate of X3 and longevity group was 0.045±0.023mm/year and 0.076±0.031mm/year, respectively (P<0.001). No osteolysis was found on plain X-rays in both groups and no specific complication was related to these highly cross-linked components.

Discussion

Excellent wear resistance of both types of highly cross-linked polyethylene liner was revealed in our study. The difference of wear rate between two materials should be monitored in a longer follow-up.

Level of evidence

Level III retrospective case control study.

Le texte complet de cet article est disponible en PDF.

Keywords : X3, Longevity, PolyWare, Tapered-wedge, Cementless, Cross-linked polyethylene, Wear

☆	Cet article peut être consulté in extenso dans la version anglaise de la revue Orthopaedics & Traumatology: Surgery & Research sur Science Direct (sciencedirect.com) en utilisant le DOI ci-dessus.