Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
addClaim

[Ceramic-on-ceramic bearings in total hip arthroplasty (THA)].

Authors: U, Sentürk; C, Perka;

[Ceramic-on-ceramic bearings in total hip arthroplasty (THA)].

Abstract

The main reason for total hip arthroplasty (THA) revision is the wear-related aseptic loosening. Younger and active patients after total joint replacement create high demands, in particular, on the bearings. The progress, especially for alumina ceramic-on-ceramic bearings and mixed ceramics have solved many problems of the past and lead to good in vitro results. Modern ceramics (alumina or mixed ceramics containing alumina) are extremely hard, scratch-resistant, biocompatible, offer a low coefficient of friction, superior lubrication and have the lowest wear rates in comparison to all other bearings in THA. The disadvantage of ceramic is the risk of material failure, i.e., of ceramic fracture. The new generation of mixed ceramics (delta ceramic), has reduced the risk of head fractures to 0.03-0.05 %, but the risk for liner fractures remains unchanged at about 0.02 %. Assuming a non-impinging component implantation, ceramic-on-ceramic bearings have substantial advantages over all other bearings in THA. Due to the superior hardness, ceramic bearings produce less third body wear and are virtually impervious to damage from instruments during the implantation process. A specific complication for ceramic-on-ceramic bearings is "squeaking". The high rate of reported squeaking (0.45 to 10.7 %) highlights the importance of precise implant positioning and the stem and patient selection. With precise implant positioning this problem is rare with many implant designs and without clinical relevance. The improved tribology and the presumable resulting implant longevity make ceramic-on-ceramic the bearing of choice for young and active patients.

Related Organizations
Keywords

Ceramics, Postoperative Complications, Arthroplasty, Replacement, Hip, Prosthesis Fitting, Humans, Hip Prosthesis, Prosthesis Design, Prosthesis Failure

  • BIP!
    Impact byBIP!
    selected citations
    These citations are derived from selected sources.
    This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    3
    popularity
    This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
    Average
    influence
    This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    Average
    impulse
    This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
    Average
Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
selected citations
These citations are derived from selected sources.
This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Citations provided by BIP!
popularity
This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Popularity provided by BIP!
influence
This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Influence provided by BIP!
impulse
This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Impulse provided by BIP!
3
Average
Average
Average
Upload OA version
Are you the author of this publication? Upload your Open Access version to Zenodo!
It’s fast and easy, just two clicks!