Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Medical Hospital, Tokyo Medical and Dental University, 1-5-45 Yushima, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo 113-8519, Japan.
Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Medical Hospital, Tokyo Medical and Dental University, 1-5-45 Yushima, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo 113-8519, Japan.
Orthop Traumatol Surg Res. 2017 Jun;103(4):537-541. doi: 10.1016/j.otsr.2017.02.004. Epub 2017 Mar 11.
There is no previous report that directly compared wear resistance of second-generation annealed highly cross-linked polyethylene with that of first-generation remelted highly cross-linked polyethylene. We therefore performed a retrospective study at a minimum of 5-year follow-up comparing second-generation annealed and first-generation remelted highly cross-linked polyethylene in order to: (1) assess wear rates and (2) compare the incidence of osteolysis between, (3) identify the frequency of complication related to the two types of highly cross-linked polyethylene.
There is a difference in the linear wear rate and the incidence of osteolysis between the two types of highly cross-linked polyethylene in total hip arthroplasty.
In a single centre study, we reviewed 123 primary cementless total hip arthroplasties between 2010 and 2011 that were performed with 32mm alumina ceramic on second-generation annealed (X3) or first-generation remelted (Longevity) highly cross-linked polyethylene liner. There was no specific reason for the choice of the type of highly cross-linked polyethylene. There were no significant differences between the two groups in respect of gender, diagnosis, body mass index, pre- and post-operative functional and activity score, cup size, and cup orientation except the younger age in the X3 group. The mean wear rate and the incidence of osteolysis were evaluated at the latest follow-up.
One hundred nine cases followed over 5 years post-operatively (88.6% in all consecutive cases) were evaluated. X3 and Longevity were used in 54 and 55 cases, respectively. The mean follow-up was 5.3 years in both groups. The mean linear wear rate of X3 and Longevity group was 0.045±0.023mm/year and 0.076±0.031mm/year, respectively (P<0.001). No osteolysis was found on plain X-rays in both groups and no specific complication was related to these highly cross-linked components.
Excellent wear resistance of both types of highly cross-linked polyethylene liner was revealed in our study. The difference of wear rate between two materials should be monitored in a longer follow-up.
Level III retrospective case control study.
目前尚无直接比较第二代退火型高交联聚乙烯与第一代再熔化型高交联聚乙烯耐磨性的报道。因此,我们进行了一项回顾性研究,对至少 5 年的随访结果进行比较,以评估两种类型的高交联聚乙烯的:(1)磨损率;(2)骨溶解发生率;(3)与两种类型的高交联聚乙烯相关的并发症发生频率。
在全髋关节置换术中,两种类型的高交联聚乙烯在线性磨损率和骨溶解发生率方面存在差异。
在单中心研究中,我们回顾了 2010 年至 2011 年间使用 32mm 氧化铝陶瓷对第二代退火型(X3)或第一代再熔化型(长寿)高交联聚乙烯衬垫进行的 123 例初次非骨水泥全髋关节置换术。选择高交联聚乙烯类型没有特定的原因。两组在性别、诊断、体重指数、术前和术后功能和活动评分、杯大小和杯方向方面没有显著差异,除了 X3 组年龄较小。在最后一次随访时评估平均磨损率和骨溶解发生率。
109 例患者术后随访 5 年以上(所有连续病例的 88.6%)进行评估。X3 和长寿分别用于 54 例和 55 例患者。两组的平均随访时间均为 5.3 年。X3 和长寿组的平均线性磨损率分别为 0.045±0.023mm/年和 0.076±0.031mm/年(P<0.001)。两组 X 线平片均未见骨溶解,且无特定并发症与这些高交联部件有关。
本研究表明,两种类型的高交联聚乙烯衬垫均具有优异的耐磨性。两种材料的磨损率差异应在更长的随访中进行监测。
三级回顾性病例对照研究。