This paper investigates the failure of a total hip prosthesis due to the disruption of the PE inlay and the Ti-alloy metal back of the acetabular component. The PE inlay was coupled with an alumina ball head. The case analysis showed that the initiator of the failure was the size selection of the prosthesis, followed by the positioning of the acetabular component. The deformation of the PE inlay leads to rupture of the inlay itself, followed by the direct contact between the alumina ball head and the titanium alloy cup, causing the disruption of the Ti-alloy metal back, with massive release of wear debris in the surrounding tissues.
SauerW.L., AnthonyM.E.. Predicting the clinical wear performance of orthopaedic bearing surfaces. In: JacobsJ.J., CraigT.L., eds. ASTM STP 1346: Alternative bearing surfaces in total joint replacements.West Conshohocken, PA, USA: ASTM; 1995: 1–29.
2.
PazzagliaU., CecilianiL., WilkinsonM.J.. Involvement of metal particles in loosening of metal-plastic hip prostheses. J Orthop Trauma1978; 4(2): 214–25.
3.
WillertH.G., BertramH., BuchornG.H.. Osteolysis in the alloplasty of the hip. Clin Orthop1990; 258: 95–107.
4.
JastyM.. Clinical review: particulate debris and failure of total hip replacements. J Appl Biomat1993; 4: 273–276.
5.
LewisG.. Polyethylene wear in total hip and knee arthroplasties. J Biomed Mater Res1997; 38(1): 55–75.
6.
SchmalzriedT.P., CallaghanJ.J.. Current concepts review: wear in total hip and knee replacements. J Bone Joint Surg1999; 81-A (1): 115–36.
7.
BlackJ.. Prospects for alternate bearing surfaces in total replacement arthroplasty of the hip. In: PuhlW., ed. Performance of the wear couple BIOLOX forte in hip arthroplasty.Stuttgart, Germany: F Henke Verlag; 1997: 2–10.
8.
HeckD.A., PartridgeC.M., ReubenJ.D., LanzerW.L., LewisC.G., KeatingE.M.. Prosthetic component failures in hip arthroplasty surgery. J Arthroplasty1995; 10(5): 575–80.
9.
BonoJ.V., SanfordL., ToussaintJ.T.. Severe polyethylene wear in total hip arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty1994; 9: 119.
10.
OonishiH., TsujiE., KimY.Y.. Retrieved total hip prostheses: The effects of cup thickness, head size and fusion defects on wear. J Biomed Mater Res1998; 9: 393–402.
11.
OonishiH., TakayamaY., HishashiI.. Wear comparison of metal and alumina against plastic. In: CoombsH., GristinaA., HungerfordD., eds. Joint Replacement: state of the art. St.Louis, Missouri, USA: Mosby-Year Book Inc; 1990: 23–7.
12.
OonishiH., AminoH., UenoM., YunokiH.. Concepts and design with ceramics. For total hip and knee replacement. In: SedelL., WillmannG., eds. Reliability and long-term results of ceramics in orthopaedics.Stuttgart, Germany: Georg Thieme Verlag; 1999; 7–28.
13.
SaikkoV.E.Wear of the polyethylene acetabular cup. Acta Orthop Scand1995; 66(6): 501–6.
14.
BartelD.L., BursteinA.H., TodaM.D., EdwardsD.L.. The effect of conformity and plastic thickness on contact stresses in metal-backed plastic implants. J Biomech Eng1995; 107(3): 193–9.
15.
CharnleyJ., KamangarA., LongfieldM.D.. The optimum size of prosthetic heads, in relation to the wear of plastic sockets in total replacement of the hip. Med Biol Eng1969; 7: 31–9.
16.
ClarkeI.C., FujisawaA., JungH.. Influence of ball head diameter on polyethylene wear rates. Trans Soc Biomater1993; 19: 57.
17.
BragdonC.R., O'ConnorD.O., LowensteinG.D., RamamurtiB., JastyM., HarrisW.H.. Quantitative comparison of volumetric wear using 22mm, 26mm and 32mm femoral heads: an hip simulator study. Trans Soc Biomater1998; 24: 361.
18.
O'ConnorD.O., BurkeD.W., BragdonC.R., RamurtiB.S., HarrisW.H.. Dynamic frictional comparison of different femoral head sizes and different lubricants. Trans Soc Biomater1998; 24: 356.
19.
KaboJ.M., GebhardJ.S., LorenG., AmstutzH.C.. In vivo wear of polyethylene acetabular components. J Bone Joint Surg1993; 75-B: 254–8.
20.
LivermoreJ., IlstrupD., MorreyB.. Effect of femoral head size on the wear of the polyethylene acetabular component. J Bone Joint Surg1990; 72-A (4: 518–528.
21.
HirakawaK., BauerT., HashimotoY., StulbergB.N., WildeA.W., SecicM.. Effect of femoral head diameter on tissue concentration of wear debris. J Biomed Mater Res1997; 36(4): 529–35.
22.
SemlitschM., LehmannM., DorreE., WillertH.. New prospect for a prolonged functional life span of artificial hip joints by using the material combination polyethylene/aluminium oxide ceramic/metal. J Biomed Mater Res1977; 1: 537.
23.
OonishiH., IgakiH., TakayamaY.. Comparison of wear of PE sliding against metal and alumina in total hip prosthesis. In: OonishiH., AokiH., SawaiK. eds. Ishiyaku EuroAmerica Inc. Publ., Brentwood, Missouri, Bioceramics 1, USA: 1989; 272.
24.
WeberB.G.. Total hip replacement: rotating versus fixed and metallic versus ceramic heads. Hip International1981; 264–75.
25.
SemlitschM., WillertH.B.. Clinical wear behaviour of ultra high molecular weight polyethylene cups paired with metal and ceramic ball heads in comparison to metal on metal pairings of hip joint replacements. Proc Inst Mech Eng1997; 211-H: 73–88.
26.
PatelJ., ScottJ.E., WarwickJ., RadfordP.. Severe polyethylene wear in uncemented acetabular cup system components. J Arthroplasty1999; 14(5): 635–6.
27.
BerryD.J., BarnesC.L., ScottR.D., CabanelaM.E., PossR.. Catastrophic failure of the polyethylene liner of uncemented acetabular components. J Bone Joint Surg1994; 76B: 575–8.
