We compared clinical outcomes and polyethylene wear for 2 young primary THA patient cohorts (<50 years of age) at mid-term follow-up. In total, 72 patients (84 hips) received a coventional polyethylene liner (CPE) and 84 patients (89 hips) received a highly cross-linked polyethylene liner (HXLPE). Mean Harris Hip Score improved to 81 points for both groups. UCLA activity scores were higher for HXLPE patients (6.0 vs 5.3, p = 0.03), with lower mean linear wear (0.02 vs 0.13 mm/year, p<0.001) and lower mean volumetric wear (75.1 vs 229.8 mm3, p<0.001) at an average of 70 months follow-up. No HXLPE patient required revision for wear related concerns, compared to 5 CPE patients with revision for aseptic loosening or impending radiographic failure (0% vs 5.9%, p = 0.02). HXLPE is associated with reduced wear among young, active THA patients without increased risk of early mechanical failure.
ClohisyJCCalvertGTullFMcDonaldDMaloneyWJReasons for revision hip surgery: a retrospective review.Clin Orthop Relat Res2004;429188–192
2.
UlrichSDSeylerTMBennettDTotal hip arthroplasties: what are the reasons for revision?Int Orthop2008;32(5):597–604
3.
DorrLDWanZLongjohnDBDuboisBMurkenRTotal hip arthroplasty with use of the Metasul metal-on-metal articulation.Four to seven-year results. J Bone Joint Surg Am200082(6):789–798
4.
HernigouPBahramiTZirconia and alumina ceramics in comparison with stainless-steel heads.Polyethylene wear after a minimum ten-year follow-up. J Bone Joint Surg Br2003;85(4):504–509
5.
HannoucheDHamadoucheMNizardRBizotPMeunierASedelLCeramics in total hip replacement.Clin Orthop Relat Res2005;430:62–71
6.
KimYHComparison of polyethylene wear associated with cobalt-chromium and zirconia heads after total hip replacement.A prospective, randomized study. J Bone Joint Surg Am2005;87(8):1769–1776
7.
IseKKawanabeKTamuraJAkiyamaHGotoKNakamuraTClinical results of the wear performance of cross-linked polyethylene in total hip arthroplasty: prospective randomized trial.J Arthroplasty2009;24(8):1216–1220
8.
KurtzSMLauEOngKZhaoKKellyMBozicKJFuture young patient demand for primary and revision joint replacement: national projections from 2010 to 2030.Clin Orthop Relat Res2009;467(10):2606–2612
9.
BizotPBanallecLSedelLNizardRAlumina-on-alumina total hip prostheses in patients 40 years of age or younger.Clin Orthop Relat Res2000;379:68–76
10.
D'AntonioJCapelloWManleyMNaughtonMSuttonKAlumina ceramic bearings for total hip arthroplasty: five-year results of a prospective randomized study.Clin Orthop Relat Res2005;436:164–171
11.
D'AntonioJAManleyMTCapelloWNFive-year experience with Crossfire highly cross-linked polyethylene.Clin Orthop Relat Res2005;441:143–150
12.
Garcia-CimbreloEGarcia-ReyEMurcia-MazónABlanco-PozoAMartíEAlumina-on-alumina in THA: a multicenter prospective study.Clin Orthop Relat Res2008;466(2):309–316
13.
MeskoJWD'AntonioJACapelloWNBierbaumBENaughtonMCeramic-on-ceramic hip outcome at a 5- to 10-year interval: has it lived up to its expectations?J Arthroplasty201126(2):172–177
14.
LongWTDastaneMHarrisMJWanZDorrLDFailure of the Durom Metasul acetabular component.Clin Orthop Relat Res2010;468(2):400–405
15.
RestrepoCPostZDKaiBHozackWJThe effect of stem design on the prevalence of squeaking following ceramic-on-ceramic bearing total hip arthroplasty.J Bone Joint Surg Am201092(3):550–557
16.
BollandBJCullifordDJLangtonDJMillingtonJPArdenNKLathamJMHigh failure rates with a large-diameter hybrid metal-on-metal total hip replacement: clinical, radiological and retrieval analysis.J Bone Joint Surg Br2011;93(5):608–615
17.
SchroderDBornsteinLBostromMPNestorBJPadgettDEWestrichGHCeramic-on-ceramic total hip arthroplasty: incidence of instability and noise.Clin Orthop Relat Res2011469(2):437–442
18.
SextonSAYeungEJacksonMPThe role of patient factors and implant position in squeaking of ceramic-on-ceramic total hip replacements.J Bone Joint Surg Br2011;93(4):439–442
19.
PoratMParviziJSharkeyPFBerendKRLombardiAVJrBarrackRLCauses of failure of ceramic-on-ceramic and metal-on-metal hip arthroplasties.Clin Orthop Relat Res2012470(2):382–387
20.
HugKTWattersTSVailTPBolognesiMPThe withdrawn ASR™ THA and hip resurfacing systems: how have our patients fared over 1 to 6 years?Clin Orthop Relat Res2013;471(2):430–438
21.
BradfordLBakerDAGrahamJChawanARiesMDPruittLAWear and surface cracking in early retrieved highly cross-linked polyethylene acetabular liners.J Bone Joint Surg Am2004;86(6):1271–1282
22.
DigasGKärrholmJThannerJMalchauHHerbertsPThe Otto Aufranc Award. Highly cross-linked polyethylene in total hip arthroplasty: randomized evaluation of penetration rate in cemented and uncemented sockets using radiostereometric analysis.Clin Orthop Relat Res2004;429:6–16
23.
DigasGKärrholmJThannerJHerbertsP5-year experience of highly cross-linked polyethylene in cemented and uncemented sockets: two randomized studies using radiostereometric analysis.Acta Orthop2007;78(6):746–754
24.
CalvertGTDevanePAFieldenJAdamsKHorneJGA double-blind, prospective, randomized controlled trial comparing highly cross-linked and conventional polyethylene in primary total hip arthroplasty.J Arthroplasty2009;24(4):505–510
25.
BabovicNTrousdaleRTTotal hip arthroplasty using highly cross-linked polyethylene in patients younger than 50 years with minimum 10-year follow-up.J Arthroplasty2013;28(5): 815–817
26.
ZahiriCASchmalzriedTPSzuszczewiczESAmstutzHCAssessing activity in joint replacement patients.J Arthroplasty1998;13(8):890–895
27.
ClohisyJCHarrisWHThe Harris-Galante porous-coated acetabular component with screw fixation.An average ten-year follow-up study. J Bone Joint Surg Am1999;81(1):66–73
28.
DeLeeJGCharnleyJRadiological demarcation of cemented sockets in total hip replacement.Clin Orthop Relat Res1976;121:20–32
29.
GruenTAMcNeiceGMAmstutzHC“Modes of failure” of cemented stem-type femoral components: a radiographic analysis of loosening.Clin Orthop Relat Res1979;141:17–27
30.
EnghCAJrCulpepperWJIIEnghCALong-term results of use of the anatomic medullary locking prosthesis in total hip arthroplasty.J Bone Joint Surg Am1997;79(2):177–184
31.
BrookerAFBowermanJWRobinsonRARileyLHJrEctopic ossification following total hip replacement.Incidence and a method of classification. J Bone Joint Surg Am1973;55(8): 1629–1632
32.
MartellJMBerdiaSDetermination of polyethylene wear in total hip replacements with use of digital radiographs.J Bone Joint Surg Am1997;79(11):1635–1641
33.
SchmalzriedTPSzuszczewiczESNorthfieldMRQuantitative assessment of walking activity after total hip or knee replacement.J Bone Joint Surg Am1998;80(1):54–59
34.
MaloneyWJGalanteJOAndersonMFixation, polyethylene wear, and pelvic osteolysis in primary total hip replacement.Clin Orthop Relat Res1999;369157–164
35.
McKellopHShenFWLuBCampbellPSaloveyRDevelopment of an extremely wear-resistant ultra high molecular weight polyethylene for total hip replacements.J Orthop Res199917(2):157–167
36.
DunkleyABEldridgeJDLeeMBSmithEJLearmonthIDCementless acetabular replacement in the young.A 5- to 10-year prospective study. Clin Orthop Relat Res2000;376149–155
37.
BragdonCRKwonYMGellerJAMinimum 6-year followup of highly cross-linked polyethylene in THA.Clin Orthop Relat Res2007;465(465):122–127
38.
McCaldenRWMacDonaldSJRorabeckCHBourneRBChessDGCharronKDWear rate of highly cross-linked polyethylene in total hip arthroplasty.A randomized controlled trial. J Bone Joint Surg Am2009;91(4):773–782
39.
TriclotPGrosjeanGEl MasriFCourpiedJPHamadoucheMA comparison of the penetration rate of two polyethylene acetabular liners of different levels of cross-linking.A prospective randomised trial. J Bone Joint Surg Br2007;89(11):1439–1445
40.
LachiewiczPFHeckmanDSSoileauESManglaJMartellJMFemoral head size and wear of highly cross-linked polyethylene at 5 to 8 years.Clin Orthop Relat Res2009;467(12):3290–3296
41.
BragdonCRGreeneMEFreibergAAHarrisWHMalchauHRadiostereometric analysis comparison of wear of highly cross-linked polyethylene against 36- vs 28-mm femoral heads.J Arthroplasty2007;226 Suppl 2:125–129
42.
CallarySAFieldJRCampbellDGLow wear of a second-generation highly crosslinked polyethylene liner: a 5-year radiostereometric analysis study.Clin Orthop Relat Res2013;471(11): 3596–3600
43.
Orradre BuruscoIRomeroRBrunMLópez BlascoJJCross-linked ultra-high-molecular weight polyethylene liner and ceramic femoral head in total hip arthroplasty: a prospective study at 5 years follow-up.Arch Orthop Trauma Surg2011;131(12): 1711–1716
44.
ReynoldsSEMalkaniALRamakrishnanRYakkantiMRWear analysis of first-generation highly cross-linked polyethylene in primary total hip arthroplasty: an average 9-year follow-up.J Arthroplasty2012;27(6):1064–1068
45.
GeerdinkCHGrimmBVenckenWHeyligersICToninoAJCross-linked compared with historical polyethylene in THA: an 8-year clinical study.Clin Orthop Relat Res2009;467(4):979–984
46.
RanawatASTsailisPMeftahMKoobTWRodriguezJARanawatCSMinimum 5-year wear analysis of first-generation highly cross-linked polyethylene in patients 65 years and younger.J Arthroplasty2012;27(3):354–357
47.
HowieDWHolubowyczOTMiddletonRLarge Articulation Study Group.Large femoral heads decrease the incidence of dislocation after total hip arthroplasty: a randomized controlled trial. J Bone Joint Surg Am2012;94(12):1095–1102
48.
LachiewiczPFSoileauEEllisJModular revision for recurrent dislocation of primary or revision total hip arthroplasty.J Arthroplasty2004;19(4):424–429
