» Articles » PMID: 20953855

Do Large Heads Enhance Stability and Restore Native Anatomy in Primary Total Hip Arthroplasty?

Overview
Publisher Wolters Kluwer
Specialty Orthopedics
Date 2010 Oct 19
PMID 20953855
Citations 38
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Background: Dislocation remains a serious complication in hip arthroplasty. Resurfacing proponents tout anatomic femoral head restoration as an advantage over total hip arthroplasty. However, advances in bearings have expanded prosthetic head options from traditional sizes of 22, 26, 28, and 32 mm to diameters as large as 60 mm. Large heads reportedly enhance stability owing to increased range of motion before impingement and increased jump distance to subluxation. Available larger diameter material combinations include metal- or ceramic-on-highly crosslinked polyethylene and metal-on-metal, each with distinct advantages and disadvantages.

Questions/purposes: We sought to determine (1) if using larger diameter heads has lowered our dislocation rate; and (2) how closely an anatomic metal-on-metal bearing with diameters to 60 mm replicates native femoral head size.

Methods: We retrospectively reviewed 2020 primary arthroplasties performed with large heads (≥ 36 mm) in 1748 patients and noted dislocation incidence. In a prospective subset of 89 cases using anatomic heads, native femoral head diameter was measured intraoperatively with calipers by an independent observer and later compared with implanted size.

Results: One dislocation has occurred in 2020 hips for an incidence of 0.05%. The prosthetic head averaged 0.7 mm larger than the native head with 68 of 89 (76%) reconstructed to within ± 2 mm of native size.

Conclusions: Larger diameter heads have contributed to lower dislocation rates and large-diameter metal-on-metal articulation can provide close anatomic restoration in primary THA.

Citing Articles

Head size in Delta ceramic-on-ceramic total hip arthroplasty: a comparative registry study.

Castagnini F, Bordini B, Cosentino M, Diquattro E, Gorgone M, Traina F Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 2024; 144(9):4163-4170.

PMID: 39225803 DOI: 10.1007/s00402-024-05504-1.


A new seven-axis robotic-assisted total hip arthroplasty system improves component positioning: a prospective, randomized, multicenter study.

Tian R, Gao X, Kong N, Li X, Li Y, Wang J Sci Rep. 2024; 14(1):12643.

PMID: 38825602 PMC: 11144703. DOI: 10.1038/s41598-024-63624-5.


Using preoperative planning software to assess the effect of head length on prosthetic range of motion in a high-risk population: a three-dimensional modeling study.

Eslam Pour A, Tung W, Donnelley C, Tommasini S, Wiznia D Int Orthop. 2024; 48(9):2403-2410.

PMID: 38767711 DOI: 10.1007/s00264-024-06191-8.


Total hip arthroplasty with monobloc press-fit acetabular components and large-diameter bearings for atypical acetabula is safe: a consecutive case series of 125 hips with mean follow-up of 9 years.

Synnott P, Kiss M, Shahin M, Morcos M, Binette B, Vendittoli P Can J Surg. 2024; 67(1):E40-E48.

PMID: 38320777 PMC: 10852195. DOI: 10.1503/cjs.014022.


Metal-on-Metal Hips: Ten-Year Clinical and Radiographic Outcomes of the ADEPT Metal-on-Metal Hip Resurfacing and Modular Total Hip Arthroplasty.

Mancino F, Finsterwald M, Jones C, Prosser G, Yates P J Clin Med. 2023; 12(3).

PMID: 36769537 PMC: 9917924. DOI: 10.3390/jcm12030889.


References
1.
Bragdon C, Greene M, Freiberg A, Harris W, Malchau H . Radiostereometric analysis comparison of wear of highly cross-linked polyethylene against 36- vs 28-mm femoral heads. J Arthroplasty. 2007; 22(6 Suppl 2):125-9. DOI: 10.1016/j.arth.2007.03.009. View

2.
Schmalzried T, Peters P, Maurer B, Bragdon C, Harris W . Long-duration metal-on-metal total hip arthroplasties with low wear of the articulating surfaces. J Arthroplasty. 1996; 11(3):322-31. DOI: 10.1016/s0883-5403(96)80085-4. View

3.
Digas G, Karrholm J, Thanner J, Malchau H, Herberts P . Highly cross-linked polyethylene in cemented THA: randomized study of 61 hips. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2003; (417):126-38. DOI: 10.1097/01.blo.0000096802.78689.45. View

4.
Paterno S, Lachiewicz P, Kelley S . The influence of patient-related factors and the position of the acetabular component on the rate of dislocation after total hip replacement. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1997; 79(8):1202-10. DOI: 10.2106/00004623-199708000-00013. View

5.
Meek R, Allan D, McPhillips G, Kerr L, Howie C . Epidemiology of dislocation after total hip arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2006; 447:9-18. DOI: 10.1097/01.blo.0000218754.12311.4a. View