Polyethylene Wear Is Influenced by Manufacturing Technique in Modular TKA

Polyethylene insert backside surface wear is implicated in osteolysis and failure of total knee arthroplasty. Manufacturing and sterilization methods reduce articular-sided wear. We questioned whether manufacturing technique influences the severity of backside wear. We examined 39 explanted tibial bearings in a blinded fashion using visual, stereomicroscopic, and scanning electron microscopic techniques. We examined 26 direct compression molded components and 13 nondirect compression molded components and applied a new backside wear severity score. The score characterized the magnitude of the various modes of wear with severity ranging from 0 (no wear) to 27 (severe wear). Time in vivo, tibial baseplate material, and manufacturing technique were used as variables for comparison. Backside wear was related to polyethylene manufacturing process with direct compression molded implants having a wear score of 2.3 and nondirect compression molded a score of 5.7. Time in vivo influenced backside wear, although direct compression molded predicted decreased backside wear independent of time in vivo. The data suggest manufacturing technique influences backside wear in total knee arthroplasty polyethylene inserts.

[1]  G. Engh,et al.  In Vivo Deterioration of Tibial Baseplate Locking Mechanisms in Contemporary Modular Total Knee Components , 2001, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. American volume.

[2]  Gerard A Engh,et al.  Tibial Interface Wear in Retrieved Total Knee Components and Correlations with Modular Insert Motion , 2002, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. American volume.

[3]  D. Wirtz,et al.  Measures for reducing ultra-high-molecular-weight polyethylene wear in total knee replacement: a simulator study / Reduzierter UHMWPE-Abrieb im Rahmen der Knieendoprothetik: eine Simulatorstudie , 2007, Biomedizinische Technik. Biomedical engineering.

[4]  T. Bauer,et al.  Comparison and quantitation of wear debris of failed total hip and total knee arthroplasty. , 1996, Journal of biomedical materials research.

[5]  A H Burstein,et al.  Retrieval analysis of total knee prostheses: a method and its application to 48 total condylar prostheses. , 1983, Journal of biomedical materials research.

[6]  C. Rorabeck,et al.  Wear and osteolysis around total knee arthroplasty. , 2007, The Journal of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons.

[7]  Philip C Noble,et al.  Backside wear of polyethylene tibial inserts: mechanism and magnitude of material loss. , 2005, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. American volume.

[8]  G. Engh,et al.  Modular Tibial Insert Micromotion: A Concern With Contemporary Knee Implants , 1998, Clinical orthopaedics and related research.

[9]  G. Engh,et al.  Polyethylene wear of metal-backed tibial components in total and unicompartmental knee prostheses. , 1992, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. British volume.

[10]  P. Sharkey,et al.  Why Are Total Knee Arthroplasties Failing Today? , 2002 .

[11]  Orhun K Muratoglu,et al.  Optical analysis of surface changes on early retrievals of highly cross-linked and conventional polyethylene tibial inserts. , 2003, The Journal of arthroplasty.

[12]  P. Walker,et al.  Wear of ultra-high-molecular-weight polyethylene components of 90 retrieved knee prostheses. , 1988, The Journal of arthroplasty.

[13]  G. Holt,et al.  The biology of aseptic osteolysis. , 2007, Clinical orthopaedics and related research.

[14]  J. Currier,et al.  Effect of fabrication method and resin type on performance of tibial bearings. , 2000, Journal of biomedical materials research.

[15]  L. Whiteside,et al.  Effect of polyethylene quality on wear in total knee arthroplasty. , 1995, Clinical orthopaedics and related research.

[16]  J D DesJardins,et al.  Effects of in vitro wear of machined and molded UHMWPE tibial inserts on TKR kinematics. , 2001, Journal of biomedical materials research.

[17]  J O Galante,et al.  Wear patterns on retrieved polyethylene tibial inserts and their relationship to technical considerations during total knee arthroplasty. , 1994, Clinical orthopaedics and related research.

[18]  C. Engh,et al.  Osteolysis after total knee arthroplasty: influence of tibial baseplate surface finish and sterilization of polyethylene insert. Findings at five to ten years postoperatively. , 2005, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. American volume.

[19]  H. Rubash,et al.  Quantitative analysis of ultrahigh molecular weight polyethylene (UHMWPE) wear debris associated with total knee replacements. , 2000, Journal of biomedical materials research.

[20]  G. Scuderi**,et al.  Assessment of Backside Wear From the Analysis of 55 Retrieved Tibial Inserts , 2002, Clinical orthopaedics and related research.

[21]  John J. Callaghan,et al.  Current Concepts Review - Wear in Total Hip and Knee Replacements* , 1999 .

[22]  V. Goldberg,et al.  Effect of Resin Type and Manufacturing Method on Wear of Polyethylene Tibial Components , 2000, Clinical orthopaedics and related research.

[23]  G. Engh,et al.  Tibial insert undersurface as a contributing source of polyethylene wear debris. , 1997, Clinical orthopaedics and related research.

[24]  P. Sharkey,et al.  Insall Award paper. Why are total knee arthroplasties failing today? , 2002, Clinical orthopaedics and related research.

[25]  J. Lonner,et al.  Prodromes of failure in total knee arthroplasty. , 1999, The Journal of arthroplasty.

[26]  J. Bohl,et al.  The Coventry Award. The effects of shelf life on clinical outcome for gamma sterilized polyethylene tibial components. , 1999, Clinical orthopaedics and related research.

[27]  T P Schmalzried,et al.  Shapes and dimensional characteristics of polyethylene wear particles generated in vivo by total knee replacements compared to total hip replacements. , 1997, Journal of biomedical materials research.

[28]  M. Conditt,et al.  Factors affecting the severity of backside wear of modular tibial inserts. , 2004, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. American volume.

[29]  V. Goldberg,et al.  Backside Wear of Miller-Galante I and Insall-Burstein II Tibial Inserts , 2004, Clinical orthopaedics and related research.

[30]  D. W. Roberts,et al.  Factors Influencing Wear and Osteolysis in Press-Fit Condylar Modular Total Knee Replacements , 2004, Clinical orthopaedics and related research.

[31]  J J Callaghan,et al.  Wear in total hip and knee replacements. , 2000, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. American volume.

[32]  J. Cuckler,et al.  Polyethylene Damage on the Nonarticular Surface of Modular Total Knee Prostheses , 2003, Clinical orthopaedics and related research.

[33]  M. Conditt,et al.  Backside wear of modular ultra-high molecular weight polyethylene tibial inserts. , 2004, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. American volume.

[34]  Gerard A Engh,et al.  Factors associated with the loss of thickness of polyethylene tibial bearings after knee arthroplasty. , 2007, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. American volume.

[35]  M. Ritter,et al.  Polyethylene wear in total hip arthroplasty. , 1995, Clinical orthopaedics and related research.

[36]  C. Rorabeck,et al.  Sources of osteolysis around total knee arthroplasty: wear of the bearing surface. , 2004, Instructional course lectures.

[37]  D. Ammeen,et al.  Epidemiology of osteolysis: backside implant wear. , 2004, Instructional course lectures.

[38]  R. E. Jensen,et al.  Analysis of the Failure of 122 Polyethylene Inserts From Uncemented Tibial Knee Components , 1991, Clinical orthopaedics and related research.

[39]  D. Howie,et al.  The correlation of RANK, RANKL and TNFalpha expression with bone loss volume and polyethylene wear debris around hip implants. , 2006, Biomaterials.

[40]  J. Currier,et al.  Overview of polyethylene as a bearing material: comparison of sterilization methods. , 1996, Clinical orthopaedics and related research.