header advert
Orthopaedic Proceedings Logo

Receive monthly Table of Contents alerts from Orthopaedic Proceedings

Comprehensive article alerts can be set up and managed through your account settings

View my account settings

Visit Orthopaedic Proceedings at:

Loading...

Loading...

Full Access

Research

CLINICAL COMPARISON OF TWO DIFFERENT CERAMIC-ON-CERAMIC BRANDS: PURE ALUMINA VERSUS ALUMINA MATRIX COMPOSITE

The 29th Annual Meeting of the European Orthopaedic Research Society (EORS), Rome, Italy, 15–17 September 2021.



Abstract

Introduction and Objective

Despite pure alumina have shown excellent long-term results in patients undergoing total hip arthroplasty (THA), alumina matrix composites (AMCs) composed of alumina and zirconium oxide are more commonly used. There are no comparative studies between these two different ceramics. We performed a retrospective case-control study to compare results and associated complications between AMC from two manufacturers and those with pure alumina from another manufacturer.

Materials and Methods

480 uncemented THAs with ceramic on ceramic (CoC) bearing surfaces (288 men and 192 women; mean age of 54.1 ± 12.4 years), were implanted from 2010 to 2015. Group 1: 281 THAs with pure alumina; Group 2A: 142 with AMC bearing in a trabecular titanium cup. Group 2B: 57 hips with AMC bearing with a porous-coated cup.

Results

The mean follow-up was 7.3 years. There was one late infection in group 1, eight dislocations, three in group 1 (1.1%), three in group 2A (2.1%), all with a 36 mm femoral head, and two in group 2C (3.5%). Liner malseating was found in one hip in group 1, and in five hips in group 2C, of these, there were four liner fractures (7.0%). Four cups were revised for iliopsoas impingement (three in group 1 and one in group 2B). Two cups were revised for aseptic loosening, one in group 1 and one in group 2A, and four revised femoral stems in group 2A, three for subsidence and another for postoperative periprosthetic B2 fracture. The mean preoperative Harris Hip Score was 48.6 ± 3.3 in the whole series and 93.9 ± 7.2 at the end of follow-up. The survival rate of revision for any cause was 98.2% (95% Confidence Interval: 96.6–99.8) at ten years for group 1, 95.8% (95% CI: 92.1–99.5) for group 2A, and 91.1% (95% CI: 83.7–98.5) for group 2B (log-rank 0.030).

Conclusions

Outcome of uncemented CoC THA in young patients was satisfactory at mid-term in all three groups. However, liner fractures were frequent in group 2B. All dislocated hips in group 2A had a 36 mm femoral head diameter, and revision due to any cause was less frequent in group 1. Pure alumina CoC THA can be used as a benchmark for comparison with newer CoC THAs.


Email: