Because the present data may be confounded by differences in age and gender, and, thus, potential differences in activity levels, a maximum of 40 patients (40 THAs) were matched according to age, gender, diagnosis and BMI (+/− 5 kg/m2. The overall average age in the matched study was 57.9 years (+/− 10.5). The average BMI was 28.3 kg/m2 (+/− 3.7). Each group had 20 males and 20 females. The diagnosis was osteoarthritis in all cases. Because of the reduction of the n-count, the probability of a Type 2 error in this matched analysis was 0.52.
Before 1995, all surgical approaches in this study were posterior without trochanteric osteotomy. After this, two of the surgeons (MAR, MEB) routinely used an anterolateral approach. All hips with anterolateral approaches were treated with trochanteric precautions for 8 weeks. The immediate weight bearing status varied with surgeon. All patients received supervised in-hospital physiotherapy, walking assisted for 6 to 8 weeks with a walker. All patients were mobilized on day 1 postoperatively. No active hip flexion beyond seventy degrees was allowed for 8 weeks. Supervised post-hospitalization physiotherapy varied among patients according to need (outpatient, rehabilitation hospital, or extended care).
The clinical evaluation was performed at 2 months, 6 months, 1, 3, 5, 7, and 10 years, and every 2 to 3 years thereafter by using the HHS. At each visit, we obtained supine AP pelvis and frog lateral hip radiographs.
The five surgeons (JBM, EMK, MAR, PMF, MEB) measured cup anteversion and abduction, along with all clinical data, at each patient clinic visit; however, the anteversion and abduction used in this study were evaluated by two observers (CF, KED) using the Martell Hip Analysis Suite™ (Orthopedic Research Institute, University of Chicago, Chicago, IL). The average anteversion in Group 1 was 18.6° (± 9.53°) in Group 1, 16.3° (± 6.32°) in Group 2, 18.2° (± 6.89°) in Group 3, 17.7° (± 8.5°) in Group 4, 20.7° (± 8.24°) in Group 5, and 15.0° (± 6.43°) in Group 6. The average anteversion was higher (p = 0.02) in Group 5 compared to the other groups. The average abduction was 45.9° in Group 1 (± 7.9°), 44.9° (± 9.0°) in Group 2, 45.8° (± 6.2°) in Group 3, 50.9° (± 7.4°) in Group 4, 46.8° (± 8.3°) in Group 5, and 50.3° (± 7.2°) in Group 6. No differences (p = 0.51) in abduction were noted among the six groups.
Femoral head penetration (FHP) rates were measured by two observers (CF, KED) using computer-assisted edge detection with the Martell Hip Analysis Suite™. The accuracy of the Martell method was evaluated by Hui et al.  who reported values equal to 0.91 when compared to a coordinate measuring machine. The software calculated wear based on digitized versions of standard radiographs by determining the location of the center of the femoral head and acetabular cup. This allows the software to determine the direction and magnitude of displacement of the femoral head, which indicated the direction and magnitude of the wear. The software uses the convention in which the wear angles are measured from the perpendicular bisector of the tuberosity line, with medial direction being positive. We used the software package’s two-dimensional volumetric wear calculations, which are a function of the vector displacements vector and the femoral head size. The most recent followup AP radiograph was compared to the initial postoperative AP radiograph (2 months) to determine overall FHP. No attempt was made to differentiate between the so-called “settling in” phenomenon of the PE liner within the shell versus PE creep or true PE wear. Rather, the total FHP was measured. The two-dimensional linear wear calculation was measured with only two data points. Three-dimensional wear data were not calculated as they have limited clinical value .
Chi square analysis was used for preoperative categorical comparisons (gender and diagnosis) among groups. A two-sample t test was used for comparison of continuous data (age, anteversion, abduction, and BMI) among groups. We used linear regression analysis (ANOVA) to determine differences in FHP rates by group, including the nuisance effects of age, BMI, gender, anteversion, abduction, bilaterality, and diagnosis. Kaplan-Meier survival (log rank) was used to compare cup survival among the six groups, with failure being defined as aseptic loosening or revision for loosening or PE wear, and the Wilcoxon forward stepwise procedure was used to test for the effects of covariates such as age, BMI, and gender on survival and linear wear. Activity level, per se, was not, specifically, reported or examined other than according the Harris score. Statistical analysis was performed using the SAS® (SAS Institute Inc, Cary, NC).
Overall, FHP was affected by cup anteversion, age, and BMI. Greater FHP was associated with increased anteversion (p < 0.001), increased BMI (p = 0.02), and younger age (p = 0.004). No association was noted between FHP and abduction (p = 0.52), diagnosis (p = 0.67), gender (p = 0.49).
The average postoperative HHS and pain scores at final followup were 92 and 41, respectively, in Group 1, 91 and 39 in Group 2, 90 and 39 in Group 3, 90 and 39 in Group 4, 91 and 40 in Group 5, and 90 and 38 in Group 6. No difference was noted among groups (Group 1, p = 0.56; Group 2, p = 0.60; Group 3, p = 0.13; Group 4, p = 0.27; Group 5, p = 0.73; Group 6, reference group) with respect to the final HHS.
FHP did, indeed, change with different manufacturing techniques of the PE FHP averaged 0.122 (± 0.125) mm per year in Group 1, 0.107 (± 0.154) mm per year in Group 2, 0.125 (± 0.375) mm per year in Group 3, 0.059 (± 0.226) mm per year in Group 4, 0.050 (± 0.163) mm per year in Group 5, and 0.045 (± 0.186) mm per year in Group 6. Thus, FHP was less (p < 0.001) in Group 4 than in Groups 1, 2, and 3. FHP was less (p < 0.001) in Group 5 than in Groups 1, 2, and 3. FHP was less in Group 6 than in Groups 1, 2, and 3 (p < 0.001) and in Group 4 (p = 0.04).
Cup survival rates were, also, different according to manufacturing techniques of the PE. Eight cups failed in Group 1 (8.5%), five for loosening, three for PE wear; two cups failed in Group 2 (2.7%), one for loosening, one for PE wear; six cups failed in Group 3 (8%), five for loosening, one for PE wear; 11 cups failed in Group 4 (1.8%), nine for loosening, two for PE wear; four cups failed in Group 5 (0.6%), all for loosening; and two cups failed in Group 6 (0.6%), both for loosening. Not all failed cups were revised, however. Cup survival with failure defined as aseptic loosening or revision for loosening or PE wear was higher at 7 years in Groups 3, 4, and 5 and at 10 years in Group 4 (p = 0.03) (Table 4). Thus, at 7 years, cup survival was greater for cups machined from direct compression-molded PE as opposed to ram-extruded bar stock.
In the matched group analysis no statistical difference was noted in FHP between the six groups (p = 0.545, one way ANOVA). FHP averaged 0.1683 (± 0.128) mm per year in Group 1, 0.0634 (± 0.132) mm per year in Group 2, 0.194 (± 0.271) mm per year in Group 3, 0.334 (± 0.236) mm per year in Group 4, 0.089 (± 0.445) mm per year in Group 5, and 0.351 (± 0.151) mm per year in Group 6 (Table 5).
Because no cups failed in the matched groups before 5 years, the 5-year survival rate in all six groups was technically 1.000. Thus, we were unable to answer the question as to whether cup survival would differ with different manufacturing techniques of the PE if patients were match according to gender, age, BMI, and diagnosis.
PE wear continues to be a major issue in THA as evidenced by the increasing number of reports of so-called highly crosslinked PE . The recent industry trends of sterilization (ethylene oxide, gas plasma, and gamma ray irradiation and inert gas) and quality improvement in packaging methodology have been introduced to minimize PE wear in THA. Radiation and thermal treatment of the PE has also been introduced to minimize wear. We compared the clinical performance and wear results of UHMWPE using the same cup system with different PE manufacturing techniques, resins, and methods of sterilization and determined that wear rates and survival would improved with PE machined from compression molded barstock and sterilized in argon gas with barrier packaging.
We acknowledge limitations to this study. First is the relative short-term followup of Groups 5 and 6 (mean of 5.0 and 3.1 years, respectively). Nevertheless, when all patients were included, differences were confirmed in cup survival at 7 years in Groups 3, 4, and 5 compared to Groups 1 and 2. In the matched grouping, however, cup survival could not adequately be determined because of the smaller number of cup failures (none) within the first 5 years. Longer followup will be needed to determine whether Group 6, with a highly crosslinked PE, will demonstrate improved survival rates. Second, we made no attempt to differentiate true PE wear from the settling in phenomenon, ie, movement of the PE liner within the shell and the plastic deformation or creep of the PE within the liner. Rather, FHP, which is a combination of all three, was measured comparing the most recent followup radiograph to the baseline radiograph. Unfortunately, the degree of “bedding in,” a combination of creep and movement of the PE within the shell, is extremely controversial and has been speculated to occur between 8 weeks  and up to 5 years . Most authors, however, will agree the bedding in phenomenon occurs within the first 24 months [1, 2, 5, 8, 12, 14]. Third, we used a two-dimensional technique to determine wear. The computer edge detection technique of Martell has been extensively studied in the literature and is more than 10 times more reliable than the Livermore technique . The Martell technique will generally measure more wear, however, than radiostereometric analysis . Furthermore, the two-dimensional measurement has been more precise because the AP radiograph is four times more reliable than the lateral radiograph . The three-dimensional technique is likely more accurate and may measure up to 10% more wear as compared to the two-dimensional technique . Thus, the three-dimensional technique has been noted to have limited clinical value [6, 10]. Therefore, only the two-dimensional technique was used in this study. Fourth, our radiographs were taken supine. A report by Garvin et al.  noted load bearing did not substantially improve or change the results of measuring wear. Fifth, the patient matching statistical analysis was not adequately powered. Thus, the null hypothesis may be incorrectly accepted. That is, it may be incorrect in stating that no difference in FHP was noted between the 6 groups (underpowered) when, in fact, there may have been significant differences in FHP. Nevertheless, we recognize the benefits of data matching. Because activity level was not specifically evaluated, the age and gender difference between the groups could mean differences in mechanical stress on the acetabular component. ANOVA does not substitute for patient matching. Thus, this portion of the study was included.
In a previous report from our institution, Faris et al.  noted the PE components sterilized with gamma ray irradiation in air and sterilized with gamma ray irradiation in inert gas with machining from ram-extruded bar stock wore at 116% and 111% of the PE wear of the PE manufactured from compression-molded bar stock and sterilized with gamma ray irradiation in argon gas. Our data confirm these findings with longer followup and also add that improved wear rates and cup survival were identified with PE machined from direct compression-molded bar stock, sterilized in argon gas, with barrier packaging. The FHP rates in Group 5 (noncrosslinked PE) and Group 6 (crosslinked PE) were similar at 0.050 and 0.045 mm per year, respectively. One might have expected the wear rate to be substantially less in the latter group. There are at least two possible explanations for this. First, the average followups for these two groups are relatively short (5 years for Group 5 and 3.1 years for Group 6). Longer followup may yield greater differences in the wear rates. Second, both groups had cup PE manufactured with the same resin and machined from compression-molded bar stock.
Other authors have reported on this particular cup system. Puolakka et al.  reported on 107 cups implanted with 28 and 32 heads but the PE thickness was not given. The average wear rate was 0.17 mm/year. The PE used was “first-generation” PE (gamma in air sterilization). Cautilli et al.  reported on 303 cups with followup between 2 and 5 years. Ti-alloy heads were implanted in all cases. Eleven cups (4%) loosened. The average linear wear was 0.5 mm/year. The PE manufacturing technique was not specifically noted. Isaac et al.  reported on 45 cups followed for an average of 7.6 years. 13% of the cups were revised or loosened. No mention was given PE thickness, wear rate, or manufacturing technique (Table 6).
Using the same ring-loc cup system, we observed lower FHP rates and higher cup survival at 7 years postoperative with PE machined from compression-molded bar stock, sterilized in argon gas, with barrier packaging.
We thank Merrill A Ritter MD, Phillip M Faris MD, and Michael E Berend MD who, along with John B. Meding MD and E. Michael Keating MD, were orthopaedic surgeons for the patient population included in this study. The authors would also like to thank Christa Frye RT for her invaluable knowledge of and contribution to the radiographic data.
1. Bankston, AB., Keating, EM., Ranawat, C., Faris, PM. and Ritter, MA. Comparison of polyethylene war in machined versus moled polyethylene. Clin Orthop Relat Res.
1995; 317: 37-43.
2. Bargmann, LS., Bargmann, BC., Collier, JP., Currier, BH. and Mayor, MB. Current sterilization and packaging methods for polyethylene. Clin Orthop Relat Res.
1999; 369: 49-58. 10.1097/00003086-199912000-00006
3. Cautilli, GP., Beight, J., Yao, B. and Hozack, WJ. A prospective review of 303 cementless universal cups with emphasis on wear as the cause of failure. Semin Arthroplasty.
1994; 5: 25-29.
4. Devane, PA. and Horne, JG. Assessment of polyethylene wear in total hip replacement. Clin Orthop Relat Res.
1999; 369: 59-72. 10.1097/00003086-199912000-00007
5. Dorr, LD., Wan, ZW., Shahrdar, C., Sirianni, L., Boutary, M. and Yun, A. Clinical performance of a Durasul highly cross-linked polyethylene acetabular liner for total hip arthroplasty at five years. J Bone Joint Surg Am.
2005; 87: 1816-1821. 10.2106/JBJS.D.01915
6. Faris, PM., Ritter, MA., Pierce, AL., Davis, KE. and Faris, GW. Polyethylene sterilization and production affects wear in total hip arthroplasties. Clin Orthop Relat Res.
2009; 453: 305-308. 10.1097/01.blo.0000229348.10458.79
7. Garvin, KL., Hartman, CW., Mangla, J., Murdoch, N. and Martell, JM. Wear analysis in THA utilizing oxidized zirconium and cross-linked polyethylene. Clin Orthop Relat Res.
2009; 467: 141-145. 10.1007/s11999-008-0544-5
8. Heisel, C., Silva, M., Dela Rosa, MA. and Schmalzried, TP. Short-term in vivo wear of cross-linked polyethylene. J Bone Joint Surg Am.
2004; 86: 748-751.
9. Hui, AJ., McCalden, RW., Martell, JM., MacDonald, SJ., Bourne, RB. and Rorabeck, CH. Validation of two and three-dimensional radiographic techniques for measuring polyethylene wear after total hip arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Am.
2003; 85: 505-511.
10. Isaac, DL., Forder, J., Skrme, AD. and James, SE. The Biomet bi-metric total hip arthroplasty and universal cup system. J Arthroplasty.
2007; 22: 697-700. 10.1016/j.arth.2006.09.015
11. Jacobs, CA., Christenson, CP., Greenwald, AS. and McKellop, H. Clinical performance of highly cross-linked polyethylene in total hip arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Am.
2007; 89: 2779-2786. 10.2106/JBJS.G.00043
12. Kurtz, SM., Muratoglu, OK., Evans, M. and Edidin, AA. Advances in the processing, sterilization, and crosslinking of ultra-high molecular weight polyethylene for total joint arthroplasty. Biomaterials.
1999; 20: 1659-1688. 10.1016/S0142-9612(99)00053-8
13. Lu, S., Orr, JF. and Buchanan, FJ. The influence of inert packaging on the shelf aging of gamma-irradiation sterilized ultra-high molecular weight polyethylene. Biomaterials.
2003; 24: 139-145. 10.1016/S0142-9612(02)00271-5
14. Manning, DW., Chiang, PP., Martell, JM., Galante, JO. and Harris, WH. In vivo wear study of traditional and highly cross-linked polyethylene in total hip arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty.
2005; 20: 880-886. 10.1016/j.arth.2005.03.033
15. Martell, JM., Berkson, E., Berger, R. and Jacobs, J. Comparison of two and three-dimensional computerized polyethylene wear analysis after total hip arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Am.
2003; 85: 1111-1117.
16. Martell, JM. and Sunjay, B. Determination of polyethylene wear in total hip replacements with use of digital radiographs. J Bone Joint Surg Am.
1997; 79: 1635-1641.
17. McCalden, RW., MacDonald, SJ., Rorabeck, CH., Bourne, RB., Chess, DG. and Charron, KD. Wear rate of highly cross-linked polyethylene in total hip arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Am.
2009; 91: 773-782. 10.2106/JBJS.H.00244
18. McKellop, H., Shen, FW., Lu, B., Campbell, P. and Salovey, R. Effect of sterilization method and other modifications on the wear resistance of acetabular cups made of ultra-high molecular weight polyethylene: a hip-simulator study. J Bone Joint Surg Am.
2000; 82: 1708-1725.
19. Oonishi, H., Kim, SC., Takao, Y., Kyomoto, M., Iwamoto, M. and Ueno, M. Wear of highly cross-linked polyethylene acetabular cup in Japan. J Arthroplasty.
2006; 21: 944-949. 10.1016/j.arth.2006.03.009
20. Puolakka, TJ., Laine, HJ., Moilanen, TP., Koivisto, AM. and Pajamaki, KJ. Alarming wear of the first-generation polyethylene liner of the cementless porous-coated Biomet Universal cup. Acta Orthop Scand.
2001; 72: 72-77. 10.1080/000164701753606608
21. Rohrl, A., Nivbrant, B., Mingguo, L. and Hewitt, B. In vivo wear and migration of highly cross-linked polyethylene cups. J Arthroplasty.
2005; 20: 409-413. 10.1016/j.arth.2004.09.040
22. Sychterz, CJ., Engh, CA., Shah, N. and Engh, CA. Radiographic evaluation of penetration by the femoral head into the polyethylene liner over time. J Bone Joint Surg Am.
1997; 79: 1040-1046.
© 2011 Lippincott Williams & Wilkins LWW
23. Wroblewski, BM., Siney, PD., Dowson, D. and Collin, SN. Prospective clinical and joint simulator studies of a new total hip arthroplasty using alumina ceramic heads and cross-linked polyethylene cups. J Bone Joint Surg Br.
1996; 78: 280-285.