Restricted accessResearch articleFirst published online 2012-7
Evaluation of the wear performance of a polycarbonate-urethane acetabular component in a hip joint simulator and comparison with UHMWPE and cross-linked UHMWPE
Acetabular hip joint components manufactured from gamma-sterilized ultra high molecular weight polyethylene (UHMWPE), gamma cross-linked UHMWPE, or polycarbonate-urethane (PCU) polymers were evaluated in a hip joint simulator, using cobalt alloy femoral components, for at least 5 million cycles. The volume of material losses due to wear was calculated for each type of sample, based upon mass loss measurements, every 500,000 cycles. The loss of material for the conventional UHMWPE was much higher than for the cross-linked UHMWPE, showing about a 70% reduction in wear due to cross-linking. The material loss for the PCU samples appears to have been at least 24% lower than for the cross-linked UHMWPE. Based upon these results, the PCU material seems to have potential for use as an alternative bearing material to UHMWPE for total hip replacement surgeries.
HarrisWH. Wear and periprosthetic osteolysis: the problem. Clin Orthop2001; 393: 66–70.
2.
AmstutzHCCampbellPKossovskyNClarkeIC. Mechanism and clinical significance of wear debris-induced osteolysis. Clin Orthop1992; 276: 7–18.
3.
GoodmanS. Wear particulate and osteolysis. Orthop Clin North Am2005; 36: 41–48.
4.
MurrayDWRushtonN. Macrophages stimulate bone resorption when they phagocytose particles. J Bone Joint Surg Br1990; 72: 988–992.
5.
WangKYHorneJGDevanePAMillerJH. Polyethylene particles from a hip simulator cause (45)Ca release from cultured bone. J Orthop Surg (Hong Kong)2001; 9: 23–30.
6.
BerryDJ. Periprosthetic fractures associated with osteolysis: a problem on the rise. J Arthroplasty2003; 18: 107–111.
7.
LearmonthIDCunninghamJL. Factors contributing to the wear of polyethylene in clinical practice. Proc Inst Mech Eng H1997; 211: 49–57.
8.
TaksaliSGrauerJNVaccaroAR. Material considerations for intervertebral disc replacement implants. Spine J2004; 4: 231S–238S.
9.
BernaccaGMMackayTGWilkinsonRWheatleyDJ. Polyurethane heart valves: fatigue failure, calcification, and polyurethane structure. J Biomed Mater Res1997; 34: 371–379.
10.
YangMZhangZHahnCLarocheGKingMWGuidoinR. Totally implantable artificial hearts and left ventricular assist devices: selecting impermeable polycarbonate urethane to manufacture ventricles. J Biomed Mater Res1999; 48: 13–23.
11.
ChandyTVan HeeJNettekovenWJohnsonJ. Long-term in vitro stability assessment of polycarbonate urethane micro catheters: resistance to oxidation and stress cracking. J Biomed Mater Res2009; 89B: 314–324.
12.
CinarBGokselOSYekelerI. Midterm results with the use of polycarbonate urethane heterografts for dialysis access. Tohoku J Exp Med2005; 207: 233–238.
13.
GeerdinkCHGrimmBRamakrishnanRRondhuisJVerburgAJToninoAJ. Crosslinked polyethylene compared to conventional polyethylene in total hip replacement: pre-clinical evaluation, in-vitro testing and prospective clinical follow-up study. Acta Orthop Scand2006; 77: 719–725.
14.
MuratogluOKWannomaeKChristensenSRubashHEHarrisWH. Ex vivo wear of conventional and cross-linked polyethylene acetabular liners. Clin Orthop2005; 438: 158–164.
15.
MuZTianJWuTYangJPeiF. A systematic review of radiological outcomes of highly cross-linked polyethylene versus conventional polyethylene in total hip arthroplasty. Int Orthop2009; 33: 599–604.
16.
McCaldenRWMacDonaldSJRorabeckCHBourneRBChessDGCharronKD. Wear rate of highly cross-linked polyethylene in total hip arthroplasty. a randomized controlled trial. J Bone Joint Surg Am2009; 91: 773–782.
17.
GeerdinkCHGrimmBVenckenWHeyligersICToninoAJ. Cross-linked compared with historical polyethylene in Tha: an 8-year clinical study. Clin Orthop2009; 467: 979–984.
18.
JacobsCAChristensenCPGreenwaldASMcKellopH. Clinical performance of highly cross-linked polyethylenes in total hip arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Am2007; 89: 2779–2786.
19.
IllgenRL, 2ndBauerLMHotujecBTKolpinSEBakhtiarAForsytheTM. Highly crosslinked vs conventional polyethylene particles: relative in vivo inflammatory response. J Arthroplasty2009; 24: 117–124.
20.
BeksacBSalasAGonzalez Della ValleASalvatiEA. Wear is reduced in THA performed with highly cross-linked polyethylene. Clin Orthop2009; 467: 1765–1772.
21.
KangLGalvinALFisherJJinZ. Enhanced computational prediction of polyethylene wear in hip joints by incorporating cross-shear and contact pressure in additional to load and sliding distance: effect of head diameter. J Biomech2009; 42: 912–918.
22.
HallRMSineyPUnsworthAWroblewskiBM. The association between rates of wear in retrieved acetabular components and the radius of the femoral head. Proc Inst Mech Eng [H]1998; 212: 321–326.
23.
EggliSz’BrunSGerberCGanzR. Comparison of polyethylene wear with femoral heads of 22 mm and 32 mm. a prospective, randomised study. J Bone Joint Surg Br2002; 84: 447–451.
24.
SaikkoV. Effect of contact pressure on wear and friction of ultra-high molecular weight polyethylene in multidirectional sliding. Proc Inst Mech Eng [H]2006; 220: 723–731.
25.
VassiliouKUnsworthA. Is the wear factor in total joint replacements dependent on the nominal contact stress in ultra-high molecular weight polyethylene contacts? Proc. Inst Mech Eng [H]2004; 218: 101–117.
26.
BragdonCRJastyMMuratogluOKHarrisWH. Third-body wear testing of a highly cross-linked acetabular liner: the effect of large femoral head size in the presence of particulate poly(methyl-methacrylate) debris. J Arthroplasty2005; 20: 379–385.
27.
LachiewiczPFHeckmanDSSoileauESManglaJMartellJM. Femoral head size and wear of highly cross-linked polyethylene at 5 to 8 years. Clin Orthop2009; 467: 3290–3296.
28.
MuratogluOKBragdonCRO’ConnorDPerinchiefRSEstokDMJastyM. Larger diameter femoral heads used in conjunction with a highly cross-linked ultra-high molecular weight polyethylene: a new concept. J Arthroplasty2001; 16: 24–30.
29.
HammerbergEMWanZDastaneMDorrLD. Wear and range of motion of different femoral head sizes. J Arthroplasty2010; 25: 839–843.
30.
BurroughsBRHallstromBGolladayGJHoeffelDHarrisWH. Range of motion and stability in total hip arthroplasty with 28-, 32-, 38-, and 44-mm femoral head sizes. J Arthroplasty2005; 20: 11–19.
31.
BerryDJvon KnochMSchleckCDHarmsenWS. Effect of femoral head diameter and operative approach on risk of dislocation after primary total hip arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Am2005; 87: 2456–2463.
32.
ShiaDSClohisyJCSchinskyMFMartellJMMaloneyWJ. THA with highly cross-linked polyethylene in patients 50 years or younger. Clin Orthop2009; 467: 2059–2065.
33.
SmithRAHallabNJ. In vitro macrophage response to polyethylene and polycarbonate-urethane particles. J Biomed Mater Res2010; 93: 347–355.
34.
SmithRAMaghsoodpourAHallabNJ. In vivo response to cross-linked polyethylene and polycarbonate-urethane particles. J Biomed Mater Res2010; 93: 227–234.
35.
KhanISmithNJonesEFinchDSCameronRE. Analysis and evaluation of a biomedical polycarbonate urethane tested in an in vitro study and an ovine arthroplasty model. Part I: materials selection and evaluation. Biomaterials2005; 26: 621–631.
36.
KhanISmithNJonesEFinchDSCameronRE. Analysis and evaluation of a biomedical polycarbonate urethane tested in an in vitro study and an ovine arthroplasty model. Part Ii: in vivo investigation. Biomaterials2005; 26: 633–643.
37.
CarboneAHowieDWMcGeeMFieldJPearcyMSmithN. Aging performance of a compliant layer bearing acetabular prosthesis in an ovine hip arthroplasty model. J Arthroplasty2006; 21: 899–906.
38.
WippermannBKurtzSHallabNTreharneR. Explantation and analysis of the first retrieved human acetabular cup made of polycarbonate urethane: a case report. J Long Term Eff Med Implants2008; 18: 75–83.
39.
SiebertWEMaiSKurtzS. Retrieval analysis of a polycarbonate-urethane acetabular cup: a case report. J Long Term Eff Med Implants2008; 18: 69–74.
40.
BurgessICJonesEScholesSCUnsworthA. Compliant layer bearings in artificial joints. part 1: the effects of different manufacturing techniques on the interface strength between an elastomeric layer and a rigid substrate. Proc Inst Mech Eng [H]2008; 222: 853–864.
41.
JonesEScholesSCBurgessICAshHEUnsworthA. Compliant layer bearings in artificial joints. Part 2: simulator and fatigue testing to assess the durability of the interface between an elastomeric layer and a rigid substrate. Proc Inst Mech Eng [H]2009; 223: 1–12.
42.
TanziMCFareSPetriniP. In vitro stability of polyether and polycarbonate urethanes. J Biomater Appl2000; 14: 325–348.
ScholesSCUnsworthABlameyJMBurgessICJonesESmithN. Design aspects of compliant, soft layer bearings for an experimental hip prosthesis. Proc Inst Mech Eng [H]2005; 219: 79–87.
45.
ScholesSCBurgessICMarsdenHRUnsworthAJonesESmithN. Compliant layer acetabular cups: friction testing of a range of materials and designs for a new generation of prosthesis that mimics the natural joint. Proc Inst Mech Eng [H]2006; 220: 583–596.
46.
SmithSLAshHEUnsworthA. A tribological study of uhmwpe acetabular cups and polyurethane compliant layer acetabular cups. J Biomed Mater Res2000; 53: 710716–710716.
47.
ScholesSCUnsworthAJonesE. Polyurethane unicondylar knee prostheses: simulator wear tests and lubrication studies. Phys Med Biol2007; 52: 197–212.
48.
AshHEScholesSCUnsworthAJonesE. The effect of bone cement particles on the friction of polyethylene and polyurethane knee bearings. Phys Med Biol2004; 49: 3413–3425.
49.
PaulJP. Force actions transmitted by joints in the human body. Proc R Soc Lond B Biol Sci1976; 192: 163–172.
50.
ElsnerJJMezapeYHakshurKShemeshMLinder-GanzEShterlingA. Wear rate evaluation of a novel polycarbonate-urethane cushion form bearing for artificial hip joints. Acta Biomater2010; 6: 4698–4707.
51.
LiaoY-SBenyaPDMcKellopHA. Effect of protein lubrication on the wear properties of materials for prosthetic joints. J Biomed Mater Res1999; 48: 465–473.
52.
St JohnKR. The effect of serum protein concentration on wear rates in a hip simulator. J Biomater Appl2010; 25: 145–159.
53.
TateiwaTClarkeICShirasuHMasaokaTShishidoTYamamotoK. Effect of low protein concentration lubricants in hip simulators. J Orthop Sci2006; 11: 204–211.
