To compare the past and present bipolar hip arthroplasty (BHA) models in terms of balance between pull-out strength and oscillation angle (OA).
Methods
The pull-out strength and OA of 8 BHA models were compared: UPF-II, IBC, and Tandem XLPE (Smith & Nephew); Ringloc x (Biomet); J-FX (DePuy); Bipolar (Nakashima Medical); Multipolar (Zimmer); and Centrax (Stryker).
Results
Respectively for the UPF-II, IBC, Tandem, Ringloc, J-FX, Nakashima Bipolar, Multipolar, and Centrax, the mean pull-out strength was 2219 N, 3303 N, 1503 N, 951 N, 1453 N, 1856 N, 1536 N, and 753 N, whereas the mean OA was 54.2°, 53.8°, 64.0°, 73.2°, 63.0°, 65.4°, 55.6°, and 75.4°. The OA was lower in the integrated types. For pull-out strength of the locking mechanism, the integrated type (IBC and Nakashima) was stronger than the metal or polyethylene ring-lock type (all others). The pull-out strength and OA were negatively correlated (r= −0.881, p=0.007), and the balance between the 2 varied for different models.
Conclusion
There is a trade-off between the pull-out strength and OA; optimal balance between the 2 should be based on each patient's need.
BabovicN, TrousdaleRT. Total hip arthroplasty using highly cross-linked polyethylene in patients younger than 50 years with minimum 10-year follow-up. J Arthroplasty2013;28:815–7.
2.
KimYH, ParkJW, KimJS. Cementless metaphyseal fitting anatomic total hip arthroplasty with a ceramic-on-ceramic bearing in patients thirty years of age or younger. J Bone Joint Surg Am2012;94:1570–5.
3.
MinBW, LeeKJ, SongKS, BaeKC, ChoCH. Highly cross-linked polyethylene in total hip arthroplasty for osteonecrosis of the femoral head: A Minimum 5-year follow-up study. J Arthroplasty2013;28:526–30.
4.
CaoL, WangB, LiM, SongS, WengW, LiH. Closed reduction and internal fixation versus total hip arthroplasty for displaced femoral neck fracture. Chin J Traumatol2014;17:63–8.
5.
MurakiM, SudoA, HasegawaM, FukudaA, UchidaA. Long-term results of bipolar hemiarthroplasty for osteoarthritis of the hip and idiopathic osteonecrosis of the femoral head. J Orthop Sci2008;13:313–7.
6.
PellegriniVDJr, HeigesBA, BixlerB, LehmanEB, DavisCM3rd. Minimum ten-year results of primary bipolar hip arthroplasty for degenerative arthritis of the hip. J Bone Joint Surg Am2006;88:1817–25.
7.
HwangKT, KimYH, KimYS, ChoiIY. Is bipolar hemiarthroplasty a reliable option for Ficat stage III osteonecrosis of the femoral head? 15- to 24-year follow-up study. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg2012;132:1789–96.
8.
BlomfeldtR, TornkvistH, ErikssonK, SoderqvistA, PonzerS, TidermarkJ. A randomised controlled trial comparing bipolar hemiarthroplasty with total hip replacement for displaced intracapsular fractures of the femoral neck in elderly patients. J Bone Joint Surg Br2007;89:160–5.
9.
HedbeckCJ, EnocsonA, LapidusG, BlomfeldtR, TörnkvistH, PonzerS. Comparison of bipolar hemiarthroplasty with total hip arthroplasty for displaced femoral neck fractures: A Concise four-year follow-up of a randomised trial. J Bone Joint Surg Am2011;93:445–50.
10.
SmrkeD, BedenR, StankovskiV. Bipolar versus total hip endoprosthesis: Functional results. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg2000;120:259–61.
11.
NarayanKK, GeorgeT. Functional outcome of fracture neck of femur treated with total hip replacement versus bipolar arthroplasty in a South Asian population. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg2006;126:545–8.
12.
BatemanJE. Single-assembly total hip prosthesis—preliminary report. 1974. Clin Orthop Relat Res1990;251:3–6.
13.
MessiehM, MattinglyDA, TurnerRH, ScottR, FoxJ, SlaterJ. Wear debris from bipolar femoral neck-cup impingement. A cause of femoral stem loosening. J Arthroplasty1994;9:89–93.
14.
KummerFJ, JaffeWL, LesakaK, PerezF. Bipolar head design: Inner bearing range of motion and disassociation. Bull Hosp Jt Dis2005;63:5–8.
15.
BurgersPT, Van GeeneAR, Van den BekeromMP, Van LieshoutEM, BlomB, AleemIS. Total hip arthroplasty versus hemiarthroplasty for displaced femoral neck fractures in the healthy elderly: A Meta-analysis and systematic review of randomized trials. Int Orthop2012;36:1549–60.
16.
TsumuraH, KakuN, TorisuT. Does the self-centering mechanism of bipolar hip endoprosthesis really work in vivo?J Orthop Surg (Hong Kong)2005;13:46–51.
17.
TsumuraH, TorisuT, KakuN, HigashiT. Five- to fifteen-year clinical results and the radiographic evaluation of acetabular changes after bipolar hip arthroplasty for femoral head osteonecrosis. J Arthroplasty2005;20:892–7.
18.
ChanYS, ShihCH. Bipolar versus total hip arthroplasty for hip osteonecrosis in the same patient. Clin Orthop Relat Res2000;379:169–77.
19.
GillamMH, RyanP, GravesSE, MillerLN, de SteigerRN, SalterA. Competing risks survival analysis applied to data from the Australian Orthopaedic Association National Joint Replacement Registry. Acta Orthop2010;81:548–55.
20.
GillamMH, SalterA, RyanP, GravesSE. Different competing risks models applied to data from the Australian Orthopaedic Association National Joint Replacement Registry. Acta Orthop2011;82:513–20.
21.
HaraK, KakuN, TsumuraH, TorisuT. Analysis of wear and oxidation on retrieved bipolar polyethylene liner. J Orthop Sci2008;13:366–70.
22.
KakuN, TsumuraH, TorisuT. Qualitative analysis of polyethylene wear in a bipolar femoral prosthesis: A case report. J Orthop Surg (Hong Kong)2001;9:71–6.
23.
BirmanMV, NoblePC, CondittMA, LiS, MathisKB. Cracking and impingement in ultra-high-molecular-weight polyethylene acetabular liners. J Arthroplasty2005;20(7 Suppl 3):87–92.
24.
HolleyKG, FurmanBD, BabalolaOM, LipmanJD, PadgettDE, WrightTM. Impingement of acetabular cups in a hip simulator: Comparison of highly cross-linked and conventional polyethylene. J Arthroplasty2005;20(7 Suppl 3):77–86.
25.
NishiiT, SuganoN, MasuharaK, TakaokaK. Bipolar cup design may lead to osteolysis around the uncemented femoral component. Clin Orthop Relat Res1995;316:112–20.
26.
HessMD, BakerEA, SalisburyMR, KaplanLM, GreeneRT, GreenePW. Effect of component design in retrieved bipolar hip hemiarthroplasty systems. Orthopedics2013;36:e1180–8.
