Ceramic on Ceramic bearings in Total Hip Arthroplasty (THA) afford a low friction coefficient, low wear rates and extreme hardness. Significant complications include hip squeak, ceramic fracture and poor polyethylene performance in revision procedures due to imbedding of abrasive microscopic ceramic fragments. We report on the results of this bearing at a minimum of 10 years. A single-centre retrospective review of 449 THAs was performed. Primary outcome measures included aseptic revision and all-cause revision rates at a minimum of 10 years post operatively. Evaluation of functionality was performed with WOMAC and SF-36 scores which were performed pre-operatively and at intervals of 6 months, one year, 2 years, 5 years and 10 years post operatively.Introduction and Objective
Materials and Methods
This was a retrospective study of registry data from a National Orthopaedic Hospital for all THRs with 10-year follow-up data. Inclusion criteria were all THRs with a minimum of 10-year follow-up data. All metal-on-metal (MoM) THRs and MoM resurfacings were excluded from the analysis due to the high rate of revision associated with these bearings. Univariate and multivariate analyses controlling for confounding variables were performed to compare outcomes. A total of 1,697 THRs were performed in 1,553 patients. The four significant predictors for revision were fixation type (p<0.01), surface bearing type (p<0.01), age (P<0.05) and head size (p<0.05). Gender, BMI and approach had no effect on revision rates. The lowest 10-year all-cause revision rates were seen in cemented THRs at 1.7%. Ceramic-on-poly bearings had the lowest revision rate at only 1.2%. Metal-on-poly bearings had a 1.7% revision rate. Ceramic on ceramic bearings had a 7.1% revision rate with 1 revision for squeak and 1 revision for ceramic head fracture. The causes for revision in order of decreasing frequency were as follows: Infection (n=13, 0.7%), dislocation (n=7, 0.4%), periprosthetic fracture (n=3, 0.2%) and aseptic loosening (n=2, 0.1%). There were 2 re-revisions at 10 years in total. The smaller 22.225mm head sizes had a significantly lower revision rate than other head sizes (p<0.05). Ceramic-on-poly bearings, cemented fixation and smaller head sizes perform better in the experience of this registry. However, with multivariate analysis, these differences were shown to be insignificant.
