Edge Loading in Metal-on-metal Hips: Low Clearance is a New Risk Factor

Overview

Journal Proc Inst Mech Eng H

Specialty Biomedical Engineering

Date 2012 May 8

PMID 22558836

Citations 27

Authors

Richard J Underwood

Angelos Zografos

Ritchie S Sayles

Alister Hart

Philippa Cann

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

The revision rate of large head metal-on-metal and resurfacing hips are significantly higher than conventional total hip replacements. The revision of these components has been linked to high wear caused by edge loading; which occurs when the head-cup contact patch extends over the cup rim. There are two current explanations for this; first, there is loss of entrainment of synovial fluid resulting in breakdown of the lubricating film and second, edge loading results in a large local increase in contact pressure and consequent film thickness reduction at the cup rim, which causes an increase in wear. This paper develops a method to calculate the distance between the joint reaction force vector and the cup rim--the contact patch centre to rim (CPCR) distance. However, the critical distance for the risk of edge loading is the distance from the contact patch edge to rim (CPER) distance. An analysis of explanted hip components, divided into edge worn and non-edge-worn components showed that there was no statistical difference in CPCR values, but the CPER value was significantly lower for edge worn hips. Low clearance hips, which have a more conformal contact, have a larger diameter contact patch and thus are more at risk of edge loading for similarly positioned hips.

Citing Articles

Incidence, risk factors, and prognostic consequences of femoroacetabular cup impingement following hip resurfacing arthroplasty.

Park C, Jeong S, Lim S, Park Y Int Orthop. 2024; 49(2):399-406.

PMID: 39680084 DOI: 10.1007/s00264-024-06386-z.

Blood Metal Ion Levels After Hip Resurfacing: A Comparison of 2 Different Implants.

Ren R, Cheng R, Jordan A, Spaan J, Hornick R, Taylor 4th W Arthroplast Today. 2024; 30:101555.

PMID: 39539683 PMC: 11558035. DOI: 10.1016/j.artd.2024.101555.

What is the long-term survivorship, complication profile, and patient reported outcomes after Birmingham hip resurfacing?.

Fong S, Shah A, Hecht C, Kamath A J Orthop. 2024; 55:134-148.

PMID: 38706587 PMC: 11063114. DOI: 10.1016/j.jor.2024.04.016.

Statistical Shape Modelling the In Vivo Location of Acetabular Wear in Retrieved Hip Implants.

Bergiers S, Henckel J, Hothi H, Di Laura A, Goddard C, Raymont D Bioengineering (Basel). 2023; 10(1).

PMID: 36671617 PMC: 9854783. DOI: 10.3390/bioengineering10010046.

The in vivo location of edge-wear in hip arthroplasties : combining pre-revision 3D CT imaging with retrieval analysis.

Bergiers S, Hothi H, Henckel J, Di Laura A, Belzunce M, Skinner J Bone Joint Res. 2021; 10(10):639-649.

PMID: 34605661 PMC: 8559968. DOI: 10.1302/2046-3758.1010.BJR-2021-0132.R1.

References

Jeffers J, Roques A, Taylor A, Tuke M . The problem with large diameter metal-on-metal acetabular cup inclination. Bull NYU Hosp Jt Dis. 2009; 67(2):189-92. View

Matthies A, Underwood R, Cann P, Ilo K, Nawaz Z, Skinner J . Retrieval analysis of 240 metal-on-metal hip components, comparing modular total hip replacement with hip resurfacing. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2011; 93(3):307-14. DOI: 10.1302/0301-620X.93B3.25551. View

Kwon Y, Glyn-Jones S, Simpson D, Kamali A, McLardy-Smith P, Gill H . Analysis of wear of retrieved metal-on-metal hip resurfacing implants revised due to pseudotumours. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2010; 92(3):356-61. DOI: 10.1302/0301-620X.92B3.23281. View

Murray D . The definition and measurement of acetabular orientation. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1993; 75(2):228-32. DOI: 10.1302/0301-620X.75B2.8444942. View

Wimmer M, Fischer A, Buscher R, Pourzal R, Sprecher C, Hauert R . Wear mechanisms in metal-on-metal bearings: the importance of tribochemical reaction layers. J Orthop Res. 2009; 28(4):436-43. DOI: 10.1002/jor.21020. View

Lewinnek G, Lewis J, Tarr R, COMPERE C, Zimmerman J . Dislocations after total hip-replacement arthroplasties. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1978; 60(2):217-20. View

Walker P, GOLD B . The tribology (friction, lubrication and wear) of all-metal artificial hip joints. 1971. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1996; (329 Suppl):S4-10. DOI: 10.1097/00003086-199608001-00002. View

Isaac G, Thompson J, Williams S, Fisher J . Metal-on-metal bearings surfaces: materials, manufacture, design, optimization, and alternatives. Proc Inst Mech Eng H. 2006; 220(2):119-33. DOI: 10.1243/095441105X68953. View

Leslie I, Williams S, Isaac G, Ingham E, Fisher J . High cup angle and microseparation increase the wear of hip surface replacements. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2009; 467(9):2259-65. PMC: 2866926. DOI: 10.1007/s11999-009-0830-x. View

10.

Yew A, Jin Z, Donn A, Morlock M, Isaac G . Deformation of press-fitted metallic resurfacing cups. Part 2: Finite element simulation. Proc Inst Mech Eng H. 2006; 220(2):311-9. DOI: 10.1243/095441105X69105. View

11.

Langton D, Joyce T, Jameson S, Lord J, Van Orsouw M, Holland J . Adverse reaction to metal debris following hip resurfacing: the influence of component type, orientation and volumetric wear. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2011; 93(2):164-71. DOI: 10.1302/0301-620X.93B2.25099. View

12.

Fisher J . Bioengineering reasons for the failure of metal-on-metal hip prostheses: an engineer's perspective. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2011; 93(8):1001-4. DOI: 10.1302/0301-620X.93B8.26936. View

13.

Morlock M, Bishop N, Zustin J, Hahn M, Ruther W, Amling M . Modes of implant failure after hip resurfacing: morphological and wear analysis of 267 retrieval specimens. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2008; 90 Suppl 3:89-95. DOI: 10.2106/JBJS.H.00621. View

14.

Langton D, Jameson S, Joyce T, Webb J, Nargol A . The effect of component size and orientation on the concentrations of metal ions after resurfacing arthroplasty of the hip. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2008; 90(9):1143-51. DOI: 10.1302/0301-620X.90B9.20785. View

15.

Fan J, Myant C, Underwood R, Cann P, Hart A . Inlet protein aggregation: a new mechanism for lubricating film formation with model synovial fluids. Proc Inst Mech Eng H. 2011; 225(7):696-709. PMC: 4107775. DOI: 10.1177/0954411911401306. View

16.

Elkins J, OBrien M, Stroud N, Pedersen D, Callaghan J, Brown T . Hard-on-hard total hip impingement causes extreme contact stress concentrations. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2010; 469(2):454-63. PMC: 3018221. DOI: 10.1007/s11999-010-1632-x. View

17.

Angadji A, Royle M, Collins S, Shelton J . Influence of cup orientation on the wear performance of metal-on-metal hip replacements. Proc Inst Mech Eng H. 2009; 223(4):449-57. DOI: 10.1243/09544119JEIM518. View

18.

de Haan R, Campbell P, Su E, De Smet K . Revision of metal-on-metal resurfacing arthroplasty of the hip: the influence of malpositioning of the components. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2008; 90(9):1158-63. DOI: 10.1302/0301-620X.90B9.19891. View

19.

Langton D, Sprowson A, Joyce T, Reed M, Carluke I, Partington P . Blood metal ion concentrations after hip resurfacing arthroplasty: a comparative study of articular surface replacement and Birmingham Hip Resurfacing arthroplasties. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2009; 91(10):1287-95. DOI: 10.1302/0301-620X.91B10.22308. View

20.

Langton D, Jameson S, Joyce T, Hallab N, Natu S, Nargol A . Early failure of metal-on-metal bearings in hip resurfacing and large-diameter total hip replacement: A consequence of excess wear. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2010; 92(1):38-46. DOI: 10.1302/0301-620X.92B1.22770. View