Pang Hee-Nee, Naudie Douglas D R, McCalden Richard W, MacDonald Steven J, Teeter Matthew G
Division of Orthopaedic Surgery, London Health Sciences Centre, University Hospital, 339 Windemere Road, London, ON, N6A 5A5, Canada.
Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2015 Feb;473(2):463-8. doi: 10.1007/s11999-014-3858-5.
Highly crosslinked polyethylene (XLPE) is believed to demonstrate better wear resistance than conventional polyethylene (CPE) in total hip arthroplasty.
QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: The purpose of this study was to compare visual damage scores and micro-CT measurements of penetration, a surrogate for wear, between matched retrieved XLPE and CPE acetabular liners.
Thirteen XLPE acetabular liners were matched in terms of implant design (all were of the same design), patient age, sex, liner dimensions, duration of implantation, and reason for revision to a group of CPE liners that were retrieved in the same time period. Penetration resulting from the combination of wear and creep in the two groups of liners was measured with micro-CT. Surface damage was scored by two blinded observers using a surface damage system that considers the seven common damage modes: pitting, scratching, burnishing, abrasions, impingement, embedded debris, and delamination, and wear patterns were documented.
There was no difference (p=0.32) in total damage score between the XLPE group (14±4) and the CPE group (15±5). However, there was three times greater penetration (odds ratio, 3.1; confidence interval, 2.3-5.1; p<0.001) in the CPE group (0.18±0.09 mm/year) than in the XLPE group (0.05±0.07 mm/year). There was less volumetric loss in XLPE (82±SD 134 mm3) versus the CPE group (350±SD 342 mm3; p=0.017).
XLPE liners undergo less penetration as a result of creep and wear than CPE liners based on quantitative measurements provided by micro-CT, which was not apparent using damage scoring alone. This demonstrates the use of three-dimensional imaging techniques such as micro-CT for quantifying wear in retrieval studies.
In this study, XLPE had less wear but similar damage scores than CPE, allaying concerns that the beneficial wear properties of XLPE might come with a tradeoff arising from the increased brittleness of that material.
在全髋关节置换术中,高度交联聚乙烯(XLPE)被认为比传统聚乙烯(CPE)具有更好的耐磨性。
问题/目的:本研究的目的是比较配对取出的XLPE和CPE髋臼衬垫的视觉损伤评分以及磨损替代指标——穿透的微观CT测量结果。
根据植入物设计(均为相同设计)、患者年龄、性别、衬垫尺寸、植入时间以及翻修原因,将13个XLPE髋臼衬垫与同期取出的一组CPE衬垫进行配对。使用微观CT测量两组衬垫因磨损和蠕变共同作用导致的穿透情况。由两名不知情的观察者使用一种表面损伤系统对表面损伤进行评分,该系统考虑了七种常见损伤模式:点蚀、划痕、抛光、磨损、撞击、嵌入碎片和分层,并记录磨损模式。
XLPE组(14±4)和CPE组(15±5)的总损伤评分无差异(p = 0.32)。然而,CPE组(0.18±0.09 mm/年)的穿透率比XLPE组(0.05±0.07 mm/年)高两倍(优势比,3.1;置信区间,2.3 - 5.1;p < 0.001)。与CPE组(350±标准差342 mm³;p = 0.017)相比,XLPE的体积损失更少(82±标准差134 mm³)。
基于微观CT提供的定量测量结果,XLPE衬垫因蠕变和磨损导致的穿透比CPE衬垫少,仅使用损伤评分时这并不明显。这证明了在翻修研究中使用微观CT等三维成像技术来量化磨损。
在本研究中,XLPE的磨损比CPE少,但损伤评分相似,消除了对XLPE有益的磨损特性可能因其材料脆性增加而产生权衡的担忧。