The Journal of Bone & Joint Surgery

The Journal of Bone & Joint Surgery, Volume 89, Issue 12

Current Concepts Review | December 01, 2007

Clinical Performance of Highly Cross-Linked Polyethylenes in Total Hip Arthroplasty

Cale A. Jacobs, PhD¹; Christian P. Christensen, MD¹; A. Seth Greenwald, DPhil(Oxon)²; Harry McKellop, PhD³

¹ Lexington Clinic, 1221 South Broadway, Lexington, KY 40504. E-mail address for C.A. Jacobs: cjaco@lexclin.com
² Orthopaedic Research Laboratories, Lutheran Hospital, 1730 West 25th Street, Cleveland, OH 44113
³ Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, University of California at Los Angeles Orthopaedic Hospital, 2400 South Flower Street, Los Angeles, CA 90007

View Disclosures and Other Information

Disclosure: The authors did not receive any outside funding or grants in support of their research for or preparation of this work. One or more of the authors, or a member of his or her immediate family, received, in any one year, payments or other benefits in excess of $10,000 or a commitment or agreement to provide such benefits from commercial entities (DePuy Orthopaedics and Biomet Orthopedics). Commercial entities (DePuy Orthopaedics, Biomet Orthopedics, and Smith and Nephew) paid or directed in any one year, or agreed to pay or direct, benefits in excess of $10,000 to a research fund, foundation, division, center, clinical practice, or other charitable or nonprofit organization with which one or more of the authors, or a member of his or her immediate family, is affiliated or associated.

The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery, Inc.

J Bone Joint Surg Am, 2007 Dec 01;89(12):2779-2786. doi: 10.2106/JBJS.G.00043

5 Recommendations (Recommend) | 3 Comments | Saved by 3 Users Save Case

Article

Comments (0)

text A A A

Abstract

Aseptic loosening secondary to wear-debris-induced osteolysis has been identified as the leading cause of late failure of total hip arthroplasty.

Highly cross-linked polyethylene acetabular liners were developed as one approach to reducing this wear.

Preclinical laboratory wear testing showed a number of cross-linked polyethylenes to have dramatically less wear than the polyethylene that had been in use for several decades.

After the initial bedding-in phase (one to two years), the percent reductions in the wear rate, as indicated by the amount of penetration of the head into the socket evident on serial radiographs, have been comparable with what was predicted from preclinical hip-simulator testing of the highly cross-linked polyethylenes.

To our knowledge, there have been no reports of clinically relevant osteolysis that was clearly attributable to wear of a highly cross-linked polyethylene acetabular liner. However, the clinical performance of these materials should be closely monitored with long-term follow-up.

Figures in this Article

Introduction

Total hip arthroplasty with use of traditional metal-on-polyethylene bearing couples has been demonstrated to be an effective treatment to improve function and reduce pain in patients with severe osteoarthritis, rheumatoid arthritis, osteonecrosis, and other conditions affecting the hip¹. Despite this overall clinical success, the clinical life span of total hip prostheses often has been limited by osteolysis and, in some cases, aseptic loosening brought on by the macrophage response to wear particles². Osteolysis secondary to polyethylene wear has been described as one of the primary reasons for late revision of total hip arthroplasties^3,4. It follows that improving the wear resistance of the polyethylene could contribute to greater durability of hip prostheses.

As a result of the aging of the "baby boomer" population, the number of primary total hip arthroplasties performed annually in the United States has been projected to increase during the next fifteen years from 208,000 to more than 384,000⁵. Not surprisingly, the number of revision procedures also is projected to increase, from 36,000 to an estimated 67,000 annually by the year 2020⁵. Furthermore, during the past decade, the indications for total hip arthroplasty have been expanded to include progressively younger patients. The increased activity level of these patients, combined with their increased life expectancy, has in turn amplified the need for greater implant durability.

Since wear-related osteolysis was first identified as a cause of revision, other bearing couples have been developed in an attempt to decrease particle generation. In the 1990s, a number of highly cross-linked polyethylenes were developed as one approach to reducing wear of total hip prostheses and, potentially, to increasing implant longevity. Laboratory wear testing of the highly cross-linked polyethylenes in hip joint simulators demonstrated dramatically improved wear resistance, with many investigators reporting reductions in wear of >90% even under adverse conditions, such as with large-diameter femoral heads, with roughened femoral heads, and in the presence of third-body particles^6-11. This review documents the midterm clinical performance, and summarizes factors potentially affecting the future performance, of total hip prostheses with highly cross-linked polyethylene bearings.

Clinical Importance of Reduced Polyethylene Wear

Reducing polyethylene wear could have a tremendous effect on the clinical success of total hip arthroplasty. Excessive polyethylene wear can lead to late failures as a result of several different mechanisms. The most common failure mechanisms that have been associated with polyethylene wear are osteolysis and aseptic loosening^3,4, and Parvizi et al.¹² recently reported that excessive wear contributed to the prevalence of late dislocations. Similarly, Clohisy et al.³ reported that aseptic loosening, dislocation, and osteolysis were the primary reasons for revision in 82% of their cases. With this in mind, it is easy to appreciate the clinical importance of improved polyethylene wear characteristics.

Revision arthroplasty has not had the same level of clinical success as primary hip arthroplasty. Many factors contribute to the poorer outcomes following revision arthroplasty; these include increased age, infection, inadequate bone stock, and an increased number of comorbidities. The decreased wear rates associated with highly cross-linked polyethylene liners may improve the longevity of primary total hip prostheses by reducing the prevalence of late osteolysis and the resultant bone loss and implant loosening. This could help to reduce the need for revision hip arthroplasty.

Manufacturing Processes

The specific processes used to manufacture the highly cross-linked polyethylenes directly affect the amount of cross-linking and, therefore, the material characteristics of these bearings. Three of the most influential factors are the dose of irradiation, the type of post-irradiation thermal processing, and the type of end-point sterilization. So-called first-generation highly cross-linked polyethylenes have been categorized into four types on the basis of these manufacturing processes: cold-irradiated and annealed, cold-irradiated and subsequently melted, warm-irradiated and adiabatic melted, and warm-irradiated and subsequently melted (Fig. 1)^13,14.

View Large | Download Slide(.ppt)
Add to My JBJS

Fig. 1: Methods of manufacturing first-generation moderately and highly cross-linked ultra-high molecular weight polyethylene acetabular liners with published clinical wear data. (Reproduced, with modification, from: Greenwald AS, Bauer TW, Ries MD; Committee on Biomedical Engineering, Committee on Hip and Knee Arthritis. New polys for old: contribution or caveat? J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2001;83 Suppl 2[Pt1]:27-31.)

In the process of creating highly cross-linked polyethylene, ultra-high molecular weight polyethylene is irradiated in order to break the carbon-hydrogen chains within the polymer, and free radicals are created. In an oxygen-rich environment, free radicals facilitate oxidative degradation of the polymer; however, free radicals can also combine with adjacent molecules to form cross-links. As the dose of irradiation increases, so does the density of the cross-linking and, therefore, the resistance to wear¹⁵. However, despite increased resistance to wear, excessive cross-linking might not lead to a better overall clinical performance because, as the amount of cross-linking increases, there is a corresponding decrease in some mechanical properties, including ultimate tensile strength and resistance to fatigue crack propagation¹⁶. Preclinical testing suggested that the optimum irradiation dose to maximize wear resistance while maintaining tensile strength and resistance to fatigue crack propagation is from 5 to 10 Mrad (50 to 100 kGy)^10,17,18.

It is not clear whether the amount of cross-linking markedly affects the risk of accelerated polyethylene wear due to impingement of the femoral neck on the rim of the liner. For example, Holley et al.¹⁸ used a hip simulator to compare the wear behaviors of polyethylene liners that had been cross-linked with 2.8, 10, or 20 Mrad (28, 100, or 200 kGy) of gamma irradiation, with the added condition of neck-liner impingement. The cups irradiated with 10 Mrad demonstrated the lowest wear rates; however, as the test progressed, those cups apparently generated more small wear particles (approximately 0.2 µm) than did the cups irradiated with 2.8 Mrad. This could be a cause for concern since it has been suggested that particles in the size range of 0.1 to 0.5 µm are more biologically active than larger particles^19,20.

As mentioned previously, the radiation that is used to generate the cross-linking, whether gamma or electron-beam (e-beam), also generates uncombined free radicals. If these free radicals are allowed to remain in the polyethylene, and if oxygen diffuses into the polyethylene during shelf storage and/or clinical use of the implant, they can predispose the material to severe oxidative degradation. With the highly cross-linked polyethylenes that were introduced in the late 1990s, the concentration of these free radicals was reduced with use of either post-irradiation melting or annealing. Melting of polyethylene means heating it above the melt point (>135°C), so that the polyethylene changes from a partially crystalline state to a completely amorphous solid. Melting allows access to free radicals in the crystalline regions by unfolding the polymer chains. The cross-links that are formed act as molecular constraints during cooling, so that the final crystallinity is lower and the crystals are smaller than before cross-linking and melting. This decrease in crystallinity, in turn, leads to an additional reduction in certain mechanical properties, such as crack resistance and fracture toughness^16,21,22.

In contrast, annealing refers to heating the polyethylene to a temperature somewhat below the melting point. This avoids the reduction in crystallinity that occurs with melting. However, annealing is much less effective than melting in extinguishing the free radicals, and those that remain in the polyethylene can lead to long-term oxidative degradation of its mechanical properties¹⁵. As will be discussed, it is this inherent dissimilarity between melting and annealing that has led to the development of newer, so-called second-generation methods for removing the free radicals from the highly cross-linked polyethylene in an effort to avoid reducing the crystallinity.

The type of sterilization has been reported to directly affect the shelf life and wear characteristics of traditional polyethylene^23-25. Polyethylene components that were sterilized with gamma radiation in air contained free radicals and therefore were susceptible to oxidation during shelf storage and during use in vivo. Sterilization without radiation—i.e., with use of ethylene oxide or gas plasma—avoided the generation of free radicals, but the lack of cross-linking resulted in less resistance to wear, both during laboratory testing²⁶ and in clinical use²⁴.

In part, it was this inherent trade-off between oxidation resistance and wear resistance with the traditional polyethylenes that motivated the development of the cross-linked-remelted polyethylenes, in which the cross-linking is obtained by exposure to radiation. The resultant free radicals are eliminated by remelting, and the terminal sterilization is done with ethylene oxide or gas plasma to avoid reintroducing free radicals. The choice of gas plasma or ethylene oxide does not appear to have a measurable effect on the wear resistance. For example, Durasul and Longevity highly cross-linked polyethylenes (Zimmer, Warsaw, Indiana) are manufactured with use of very similar processes, with the exception that Longevity polyethylene is sterilized with gas plasma and Durasul polyethylene is sterilized with ethylene oxide. Despite the different types of sterilization, these two highly cross-linked polyethylenes have demonstrated very similar wear rates both in the laboratory and clinically^27,28.

In contrast, as with traditional polyethylene, terminal sterilization of a highly cross-linked polyethylene with gamma radiation generates free radicals in the polymer that are susceptible to oxidation. For example, in an examination of fourteen Crossfire acetabular cups (Stryker Orthopaedics, Mahwah, New Jersey) (which are annealed and terminally sterilized with gamma radiation) that were retrieved after a maximum of thirty-three months of clinical use, Wannomae et al.²⁹ measured levels of oxidation that were as high as those observed in traditional gamma-sterilized-in-air cups after fifteen to twenty years of use. In contrast, Wannomae et al. found that the level of oxidation was negligible in twelve Longevity cups (which are remelted and terminally sterilized with gas plasma) after a comparable duration of use. In an analysis of twelve retrieved Crossfire liners, Kurtz et al.³⁰ reported that oxidation was present in the unworn regions but not in the worn regions. Those authors suggested that the oxidation may not be clinically meaningful, as Crossfire acetabular liners have exhibited low wear in vivo, consistent with their high level of cross-linking³¹. Longer clinical follow-up will be needed to determine whether the oxidation of the non-bearing regions of Crossfire components might eventually impact their clinical performance.

Factors Influencing Clinical Performance

Traditionally, patient factors such as age, gender, body mass index, and activity level have been related to increased polyethylene wear; however, neither early nor midterm clinical wear of highly cross-linked polyethylene liners appears to be measurably influenced by these factors^28,31-33. The material properties and wear characteristics resulting from the specific processes used to induce cross-linking are perhaps more important than patient-related factors. Furthermore, it is important to note that no polyethylene-related complications were reported in four studies of midterm data (after a duration of follow-up of more than five years)^31,32,34,35. However, the operations in these studies were all performed by highly experienced surgeons at high-volume centers. High surgeon and hospital volumes have been associated with a decreased risk of revision^36,37—i.e., highly experienced surgeons tend to report very low revision rates, regardless of implant selection. Nevertheless, the potential for an increased risk of complications and/or failures of highly cross-linked polyethylene liners as a result of improper acetabular alignment and/or neck impingement serves as a reminder that improvements in polyethylene wear characteristics are not a substitute for sound surgical technique.

Proper alignment of the acetabular component is essential for a satisfactory long-term clinical performance of any type of polyethylene. When a cup is inserted in excessive vertical alignment, the contact zone between the ball and cup may be near or at the upper rim (equator) of the cup. This may cause excessively high stresses in the polyethylene, in turn leading to rapid wear and/or fatigue fracture³⁸. Theoretically, this problem might be exacerbated by use of some types of highly cross-linked polyethylene liners for two reasons. First, increased cross-linking and remelting both tend to reduce the fracture toughness of the polyethylene (relative to that of non-cross-linked polyethylene)^16,21,22. Second, because of its greater resistance to wear, highly cross-linked polyethylene has been made available for use with larger-diameter balls, to decrease the risk of neck-socket impingement and dislocation. As a consequence, these liners are necessarily thinner, especially at the rim in the location of the locking mechanism, which also reduces the resistance to fatigue cracking³⁹.

Although large femoral heads have been associated with increased wear of traditional ultra-high molecular weight polyethylene acetabular liners⁴⁰, this trend does not appear to carry over to highly cross-linked polyethylene liners. In a hip-simulator study comparing polyethylene wear between nominally cross-linked polyethylene liners (irradiated with 2.9 Mrad [29 kGy]) and highly cross-linked polyethylene liners (irradiated with 10.5 Mrad [105 kGy] and annealed), Hermida et al. reported that the highly cross-linked polyethylene liners demonstrated a 90% reduction in wear when they were used with a 28-mm femoral head and an 85% reduction in wear when they were used with a 32-mm head⁴¹. Furthermore, the authors stated that increasing the head size did not significantly increase the wear of the highly cross-linked polyethylene liners. Similarly, in a study with a mean duration of follow-up of 3.3 years, Geller et al. reported that clinical wear rates of Durasul and Longevity highly cross-linked polyethylene liners did not differ among groups of patients with a 36, 38, or 40-mm femoral head⁴².

Accuracy of Wear Measurement Techniques

The amount of polyethylene wear during clinical use is typically estimated by measuring the distance that the femoral head penetrated into the polyethylene liner over time. Techniques for measuring femoral head penetration on serial radiographs fall into three categories: manual, computer-assisted, and radiostereometry analysis. Each technique has advantages and disadvantages, and there is no clear consensus in the literature regarding which of the three is the most suitable for assessing femoral head penetration into highly cross-linked polyethylene liners. We are not aware of any single study in which all three techniques have been directly compared, although manual techniques have been compared with computer-assisted techniques^43,44 and computer-assisted techniques have been compared with radiostereometry analysis⁴⁵.

Some early manual and computer-assisted techniques for measurement of femoral head penetration resulted in relatively large errors in the estimations of polyethylene wear. In a hip-simulator study of polyethylene wear in which they used a phantom apparatus, Kang et al.⁴³ evaluated the accuracy of wear measurements with use of the manual techniques described by Livermore et al.⁴⁶ and Dorr and Wan⁴⁷ and the computerized technique described by Devane et al.⁴⁸. A modified version of the technique described by Dorr and Wan appeared to be the more accurate of the two manual techniques, with the 0.17-mm mean error with this technique being closer to the 0.14-mm mean error of the computerized technique described by Devane et al. than to the 0.21-mm mean error of the manual technique described by Livermore et al. In another laboratory study, Ebramzadeh et al.⁴⁴ reported that the median error of the method described by Livermore et al. was 0.1 mm, which was similar to the median errors of the two computer-assisted techniques described by Devane et al. and Martell et al.⁴⁹.

The computer-assisted method described by Martell et al.⁴⁹ presently is the most commonly used technique for assessing femoral head penetration into highly cross-linked polyethylene liners. This method utilizes edge-detection software that first identifies the margins of the femoral head and acetabular cup and then calculates the center of each component. Because variabilities in patient position, exposure dose, and other factors can distort the ellipse created by the mouth of the acetabular component, clinical radiographs can be rejected by the edge-detection software. Consequently, the method of Martell et al. is not purely automated, as observers may be required either to verify the ellipse identified by the software or to manually identify the outer rim of the acetabular cup. Several authors have reported a relatively high prevalence of negative wear values with use of this technique; these may be due to a combination of the small magnitude of wear of highly cross-linked polyethylene, inconsistent radiographic quality due to underexposure and/or patient positioning, and human error in detecting the rim of the acetabular component^31,45,50. However, since the measurement error can be in the positive or the negative direction, it is unclear if negative values lead to an underestimation of the amount of polyethylene wear. For example, despite noting that two of three observers occasionally reported negative femoral head penetration values, Bragdon et al.⁴⁵ found that wear rates estimated with the use of the method of Martell et al. were significantly larger (p = 0.0001) than those determined with radiostereometry analysis.

Radiostereometry analysis is considered to be the most accurate method for measuring femoral head penetration. This technique demonstrates the relative change of position over time between the femoral head and multiple radiolucent beads embedded in the polyethylene liner. The mean accuracy has been reported to range from 0.033 to 0.036 mm in the medial direction and from 0.022 to 0.023 mm in the superior direction^51,52. However, use of this technique in prospective clinical trials involving large numbers of patients can be both time and cost prohibitive. Also, while radiostereometry analysis may be the most accurate method for detecting migration of the head into the articulating surface of the acetabular liner, it cannot detect backside wear⁴⁵. Retrieval studies have demonstrated backside wear in 16%⁵³ and 27%⁵⁴ of modular liners made of traditional ultra-high molecular weight polyethylene, and the resultant polyethylene debris could contribute to osteolysis. We are not aware of any published studies addressing the amount of backside wear occurring in acetabular cups made of highly cross-linked polyethylene.

Early and Midterm Clinical Results

Although the apparent wear rate of the highly cross-linked polyethylenes during the first few years of clinical use has been lower than that of traditional polyethylenes, the amount of reduction has been smaller than the percent reductions measured with prior hip-simulator wear testing. As shown in Table I, the percent reductions in the rate of femoral head penetration have ranged from 23%²⁷ to 95%³⁵, depending on which traditional polyethylene was used as a control. This difference is most likely due to the fact that the majority of the penetration of the ball into the cup that occurs during the first six months of use is due to creep deformation of the polyethylene rather than to wearing away of material²⁷. Since the rate of creep is not markedly affected by the amount of cross-linking, the total penetration during the first one to two years of use tends to be comparable between the two types of polyethylene, even if one is wearing substantially less than the other.

View Larger

TABLE I Percent Wear Reductions in Early and Midterm Clinical Studies of Highly Cross-Linked Polyethylene Acetabular Liners Compared with Previously Used Polyethylenes

Manufacturing Process for Highly Cross-Linked Polyethylene	Study	Mean Duration of Follow-up (yr)	Sterilization Process for Comparison Polyethylene	% Wear Reduction
Cold-irradiated and annealed (Crossfire)	Röhrl et al.⁶³	2	Gamma-irradiated, air	85
	Martell et al.⁶⁴	2-3	Gamma-irradiated, inert	42
	Krushell et al.⁶⁵	4	Gamma-irradiated, inert	58
	D'Antonio et al.³¹	4.9	Gamma-irradiated, inert	60
Cold-irradiated and melted (Marathon)	Heisel et al.³³	2.8	Gamma-irradiated, air	72
	Sychterz et al.⁶⁶	3.2	Gas plasma	45
	Bitsch et al.³⁴	5.3	Gamma-irradiated, air	73
	Engh et al.³⁵	5.5	Gas plasma	95
Warm-irradiated and adiabatic melted (Durasul)	Digas et al.⁶⁷	2	Gamma-irradiated, inert	54
	Manning et al.²⁸	2.6	Gamma-irradiated, air	94
	Digas et al.²⁷	3	Gamma-irradiated, inert	23
	Bragdon et al.⁶⁸	3.8	Gamma-irradiated, air	83
	Dorr et al.³²	5	Gamma-irradiated, inert	55
Warm-irradiated and subsequently melted	Manning et al.²⁸	2.6	Gamma-irradiated, air	90
(Longevity)	Hopper et al.⁶⁹	2.9	Gas plasma	44
	Digas et al.²⁷	3	Gamma-irradiated, inert	31

Add to My JBJS

TABLE I Percent Wear Reductions in Early and Midterm Clinical Studies of Highly Cross-Linked Polyethylene Acetabular Liners Compared with Previously Used Polyethylenes

Manufacturing Process for Highly Cross-Linked Polyethylene	Study	Mean Duration of Follow-up (yr)	Sterilization Process for Comparison Polyethylene	% Wear Reduction
Cold-irradiated and annealed (Crossfire)	Röhrl et al.⁶³	2	Gamma-irradiated, air	85
	Martell et al.⁶⁴	2-3	Gamma-irradiated, inert	42
	Krushell et al.⁶⁵	4	Gamma-irradiated, inert	58
	D'Antonio et al.³¹	4.9	Gamma-irradiated, inert	60
Cold-irradiated and melted (Marathon)	Heisel et al.³³	2.8	Gamma-irradiated, air	72
	Sychterz et al.⁶⁶	3.2	Gas plasma	45
	Bitsch et al.³⁴	5.3	Gamma-irradiated, air	73
	Engh et al.³⁵	5.5	Gas plasma	95
Warm-irradiated and adiabatic melted (Durasul)	Digas et al.⁶⁷	2	Gamma-irradiated, inert	54
	Manning et al.²⁸	2.6	Gamma-irradiated, air	94
	Digas et al.²⁷	3	Gamma-irradiated, inert	23
	Bragdon et al.⁶⁸	3.8	Gamma-irradiated, air	83
	Dorr et al.³²	5	Gamma-irradiated, inert	55
Warm-irradiated and subsequently melted	Manning et al.²⁸	2.6	Gamma-irradiated, air	90
(Longevity)	Hopper et al.⁶⁹	2.9	Gas plasma	44
	Digas et al.²⁷	3	Gamma-irradiated, inert	31

Because of this, in midterm studies of the highly cross-linked polyethylenes (with mean durations of follow-up of approximately five years), investigators typically have excluded the penetration data from the early, bedding-in period (i.e., when creep is substantial) in order to obtain a more accurate measure of the actual steady-state wear rates. Consequently, the percent reduction in wear due to elevated cross-linking has tended to be greater in the midterm studies. Using a manual measurement technique, Dorr et al.³² found that the wear rate of thirty-seven Durasul acetabular liners (cross-linked with 9.5 Mrad [95 kGy]) at five years postoperatively was 55% lower than that of thirty-seven polyethylene liners that had been compression molded, packaged in an oxygen-free environment, and then gamma-sterilized (i.e., cross-linked) with the standard range of 2.5 to 4 Mrad (25 to 40 kGy). Using the computer-assisted method of Martell et al.⁴⁹, D'Antonio et al.³¹ found, after a mean duration of follow-up of 4.9 years, a 60% reduction in the wear of fifty-six Crossfire liners (cross-linked with 10.5 Mrad [105 kGy]) compared with the wear of fifty-three polyethylene liners that had been gamma-sterilized and thereby cross-linked with 2.5 Mrad (25 kGy) in a nitrogen environment and vacuum packaged. Furthermore, D'Antonio et al. stated that there were fewer osteolytic lesions and no revisions in the Crossfire group.

Very favorable midterm results (at 4.1 to 7.2 years) also were reported by Engh et al.³⁵, who performed a randomized, prospective study comparing the clinical performance of seventy-six Marathon liners (DePuy Orthopaedics, Warsaw, Indiana), cross-linked with 5 Mrad (50 kGy), with that of ninety traditional ultra-high molecular weight polyethylene liners that had been sterilized with gas plasma and therefore were not cross-linked. Use of the method of Martell et al.⁴⁹ showed the mean linear wear rate of the Marathon liners to be 95% lower than that of the non-cross-linked polyethylene liners at a mean of 5.5 ± 0.6 years postoperatively.

As indicated above, when the percent reductions in wear are compared among clinical studies of different highly cross-linked polyethylenes, the type of polyethylene used for the control group must be taken into account. This is due to the fact that traditional polyethylene cups that are gamma-sterilized with the allowable range of 2.5 to 4 Mrad (25 to 40 kGy) have a corresponding amount of cross-linking that, on the basis of hip-simulator studies, would result in wear rates that were about 50% lower (for cups sterilized with 2.5 Mrad) to 75% lower (for those sterilized with 4 Mrad) than those of non-cross-linked polyethylene cups (Marathon cups sterilized with ethylene oxide or gas plasma)¹⁰. Thus, if a particular highly cross-linked polyethylene is compared with a non-cross-linked traditional polyethylene in a clinical study, it will show a greater percent reduction in wear than it would if it is compared with a gamma-sterilized (i.e., moderately cross-linked) traditional polyethylene. This is illustrated by comparing the 95% reduction in wear relative to the wear of gas-plasma-sterilized (i.e., non-cross-linked) liners reported by Engh et al.³⁵ with the 73% reduction in the wear of Marathon liners relative to wear of gamma-sterilized (i.e., moderately cross-linked) liners reported by Bitsch et al.³⁴.

In several independent reviews of the literature, it was found that osteolysis is rare in patients in whom the polyethylene cup is wearing at a rate of less than about 0.1 mm/yr, but osteolysis becomes much more frequent and extensive as the wear rate increases substantially above this "threshold" value^55-58. In three studies with a mean duration of follow-up of about five years or longer, the mean rates of wear of Crossfire, Durasul, and Marathon highly cross-linked polyethylenes (Table I) all were well below 0.1 mm/yr^31,32,35. On the other hand, the osteolysis threshold of 0.1 mm/yr was established for hips with traditional polyethylene liners—i.e., those that either were not cross-linked or were moderately cross-linked during gamma sterilization. Some investigators have reported that the mean particle size is smaller with highly cross-linked polyethylene and that, in equivalent volumes, smaller particles tend to be more likely to cause osteolysis^19,20,59. If that is correct, these factors could lead to the osteolysis threshold being somewhat lower for highly cross-linked polyethylenes.

We are aware of only one published case report of clinically relevant osteolysis in a hip with a highly cross-linked polyethylene liner (a Longevity liner)⁶⁰. However, the hip in question also had a forged-steel surface-grit-blasted femoral component that, at revision, was found to be loose at the stem-cement interface. Since the osteolysis in this hip occurred endosteally around the loosened stem, with no acetabular lysis, it is very possible that the lesions were primarily due to debris produced at the stem-cement interface rather than from the cross-linked liner. Continued close monitoring of patients with highly cross-linked polyethylene components is essential to determine if the improved wear resistance that has been observed in the midterm, as summarized here, will translate into a substantial reduction in the prevalence and severity of osteolysis after long-term follow-up.

Second-Generation Highly Cross-Linked Polyethylene

In order to maximize wear resistance without the reduced mechanical properties associated with post-irradiation melting, second-generation highly cross-linked polyethylenes are being developed with use of alternative methods to extinguish free radicals. With one method, polyethylene that has been cross-linked with radiation is soaked in vitamin E to extinguish the residual free radicals⁶¹. Another method involves applying the cross-linking radiation in three doses, with annealing after each dose to reduce the free radicals⁶². As with the first-generation highly cross-linked polyethylenes, it will require years of close clinical follow-up to determine the safety and effectiveness of these recently developed cross-linking methods for reducing wear and/or osteolysis.

In conclusion, polyethylene wear of total hip prostheses is affected by multiple factors, including the type of resin used, the specific steps in the manufacturing process, the diameter of the femoral head, the alignment of the acetabular and femoral components, the weight and activity level of the patient, and other factors. At the time of midterm follow-up, first-generation highly cross-linked polyethylene liners have appeared to have decreased wear rates during clinical use and corresponding reductions in the prevalence and severity of osteolysis, which may reduce the prevalence of implant loosening and the need for revision. Despite improved wear characteristics, first-generation highly cross-linked polyethylene may be more susceptible to fatigue fracture in the presence of improper acetabular alignment and/or neck-liner impingement, particularly with the thinner liners that are used with larger-diameter balls. This highlights the need for sound surgical technique. Finally, surgeons should use caution when considering the use of second-generation cross-linked polyethylenes, pending the availability of clinical data on their safety and efficacy.

References

Laupacis A, Bourne R, Rorabeck C, Feeny D, Wong C, Tugwell P, Leslie K, Bullas R. The effect of elective total hip replacement on health-related quality of life. J Bone Joint Surg Am.1993;75:1619-26.751619 1993 [PubMed]

Malchau H, Herberts P, Ahnfelt L. Prognosis of total hip replacement in Sweden. Follow-up of 92,675 operations performed 1978-1990. Acta Orthop Scand.1993;64:497-506.64497 1993 [CrossRef]

Clohisy JC, Calvert G, Tull F, McDonald D, Maloney WJ. Reasons for revision hip surgery. A retrospective review. Clin Orthop Relat Res.2004;429:188-92.429188 2004 [CrossRef]

Harris WH. Conquest of a worldwide human disease: particle-induced periprosthetic osteolysis. Clin Orthop Relat Res.2004;429:39-42.42939 2004 [CrossRef]

Kurtz S, Ong K, Lau E, Mowat F, Halpern M. Projections of primary and revision hip and knee arthroplasty in the United States from 2005 to 2030. J Bone Joint Surg Am.2007;89:780-5.89780 2007 [CrossRef]

Affatato S, Bersaglia G, Rocchi M, Taddei P, Fagnano C, Toni A. Wear behavior of cross-linked polyethylene assessed in vitro under severe conditions. Biomaterials.2005;26:3259-67.263259 2005 [CrossRef]

Bragdon CR, Jasty M, Muratoglu OK, Harris WH. Third-body wear testing of a highly cross-linked acetabular liner: the effect of large femoral head size in the presence of particulate poly(methyl-methacrylate) debris. J Arthroplasty.2005;20:379-85.20379 2005 [CrossRef]

Harris WH, Estok D, Burroughs B, Muratoglu O, Plank G. In vitro comparison of hip wear of Marathon and Durasul using both 32 and 38-mm head diameters. J Arthroplasty.2004;19:264.19264 2004

Saikko V, Calonius O, Keränen J. Wear of conventional and cross-linked ultra-high-molecular-weight polyethylene acetabular cups against polished and roughened CoCr femoral heads in a biaxial hip simulator. J Biomed Mater Res.2002;63:848-53.63848 2002 [CrossRef]

McKellop H, Shen F, Lu B, Campbell P, Salovey R. Development of an extremely wear-resistant ultra high molecular weight polyethylene for total hip replacements. J Orthop Res.1999;17:157-67.17157 1999 [CrossRef]

McKellop H, Shen F, DiMaio W, Lancaster J. Wear of gamma-crosslinked polyethylene acetabular cups against roughened femoral balls. Clin Orthop Relat Res.1999;369:73-82.36973 1999 [CrossRef]

Parvizi J, Wade FA, Rapuri V, Springer BD, Berry DJ, Hozack WJ. Revision hip arthroplasty for late instability secondary to polyethylene wear. Clin Orthop Relat Res.2006;447:66-9.44766 2006 [CrossRef]

Greenwald AS, Bauer TW, Ries MD; Committee on Biomedical Engineering, Committee on Hip and Knee Arthritis. New polys for old: contribution or caveat? J Bone Joint Surg Am.2001;83 Suppl 2(Pt1):27-31.8327 2001

Muratoglu OK, Harris WH. Identification and quantification of irradiation in UHMWPE through trans-vinylene yield. J Biomed Mater Res.2001;56:584-92.56584 2001 [CrossRef]

Ries MD, Pruitt L. Effect of cross-linking on the microstructure and mechanical properties of ultra-high molecular weight polyethylene. Clin Orthop Relat Res.2005;440:149-56.440149 2005 [CrossRef]

Bradford L, Baker D, Ries MD, Pruitt LA. Fatigue crack propagation resistance of highly crosslinked polyethylene. Clin Orthop Relat Res.2004;429:68-72.42968 2004 [CrossRef]

Oral E, Malhi AS, Muratoglu OK. Mechanisms of decrease in fatigue crack propagation resistance in irradiated and melted UHMWPE. Biomaterials.2006;27:917-25.27917 2006 [CrossRef]

Holley KG, Furman BD, Babalola OM, Lipman JD, Padgett DE, Wright TM. Impingement of acetabular cups in a hip simulator: comparison of highly cross-linked and conventional polyethylene. J Arthroplasty.2005;20:77-86.2077 2005 [CrossRef]

Endo M, Tipper JL, Barton DC, Stone MH, Ingham E, Fisher J. Comparison of wear, wear debris and functional biological activity of moderately crosslinked and non-crosslinked polyethylenes in hip prostheses. Proc Inst Mech Eng [H].2002;216:111-22.216111 2002

Fisher J, Bell J, Barbour PS, Tipper JL, Matthews JB, Besong AA, Stone MH, Ingham E. A novel method for the prediction of functional biological activity of polyethylene wear debris. Proc Inst Mech Eng [H].2001;215:127-32.215127 2001

Gencur SJ, Rimnac CM, Kurtz SM. Fatigue crack propagation resistance of virgin and highly crosslinked, thermally treated ultra-high molecular weight polyethylene. Biomaterials.2006;27:1550-7.271550 2006 [CrossRef]

Puertolas JA, Medel FJ, Cegonino J, Gomez-Barrena E, Rios R. Influence of the remelting process on the fatigue behavior of electron beam irradiated UHMWPE. J Biomed Mater Res B Appl Biomater.2006;76:346-53.76346 2006

Hopper RH Jr, Engh CA Jr, Fowlkes LB, Engh CA. The pros and cons of polyethylene sterilization with gamma irradiation. Clin Orthop Relat Res.2004;429:54-62.42954 2004 [CrossRef]

Hopper RH Jr, Young AM, Orishimo KF, Engh CA Jr. Effect of terminal sterilization with gas plasma or gamma radiation on wear of polyethylene liners. J Bone Joint Surg Am.2003;85:464-8.85464 2003

Sychterz CJ, Orishimo KF, Engh CA. Sterilization and polyethylene wear: clinical studies to support laboratory data. J Bone Joint Surg Am.2004;86:1017-22.861017 2004

McKellop H, Shen FW, Lu B, Campbell P, 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;82:1708-25.821708 2000

Digas G, Karrholm J, Thanner J, Malchau H, Herberts P. Highly cross-linked polyethylene in total hip arthroplasty: randomized evaluation of penetration rate in cemented and uncemented sockets using radiostereometric analysis. Clin Orthop Relat Res.2004;429:6-16.4296 2004 [CrossRef]

Manning DW, Chiang PP, Martell JM, Galante JO, Harris WH. In vivo comparative wear study of traditional and highly cross-linked polyethylene in total hip arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty.2005;20:880-6.20880 2005 [CrossRef]

Wannomae KK, Bhattacharyya S, Freiberg A, Estok D, Harris WH, Muratoglu O. In vivo oxidation of retrieved cross-linked ultra-high-molecular-weight polyethylene acetabular components with residual free radicals. J Arthroplasty.2006;21:1005-11.211005 2006 [CrossRef]

Kurtz SM, Hozack W, Turner J, Purtill J, MacDonald D, Sharkey P, Parvizi J, Manley M, Rothman R. Mechanical properties of retrieved highly cross-linked Crossfire liners after short-term implantation. J Arthroplasty.2005;20:840-9.20840 2005 [CrossRef]

D'Antonio JA, Manley MT, Capello WN, Bierbaum BE, Ramakrishnan R, Naughton M, Sutton K. Five-year experience with Crossfire highly cross-linked polyethylene. Clin Orthop Relat Res.2005;441:143-50.441143 2005 [CrossRef]

Dorr LD, Wan Z, Shahrdar C, Sirianni L, Boutary M, 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;87:1816-21.871816 2005 [CrossRef]

Heisel C, Silva M, dela Rosa MA, Schmalzried TP. Short-term in vivo wear of cross-linked polyethylene. J Bone Joint Surg Am.2004;86:748-51.86748 2004

Bitsch R, Heisel C, Bal S, Dela Rosa M, Schmalzried T. Reduction of osteolysis with crosslinked polyethylene at five years. Read at the Annual Meeting of the American Association of Hip and Knee Surgeons; 2006 Nov 4; Dallas, TX. 2006

Engh CA Jr, Stepniewski AS, Ginn SD, Beykirch SE, Sychterz-Terefenko CJ, Hopper RH Jr, Engh CA. A randomized prospective evaluation of outcomes after total hip arthroplasty using cross-linked Marathon and non-cross-linked Enduron polyethylene liners. J Arthroplasty.2006;21(6 Suppl 2):17-25.2117 2006 [CrossRef]

Katz JN, Losina E, Barrett J, Phillips CB, Mahomed NN, Lew RA, Guadagnoli E, Harris WH, Poss R, Baron JA. Association between hospital and surgeon procedure volume and outcomes of total hip replacement in the United States Medicare population. J Bone Joint Surg Am.2001;83:1622-9.831622 2001

Losina E, Barrett J, Mahomed NN, Baron JA, Katz JN. Early failures of total hip replacement: effect of surgeon volume. Arthritis Rheum.2004;50:1338-43.501338 2004 [CrossRef]

Bradford L, Baker DA, Graham J, Chawan A, Ries MD, Pruitt LA. Wear and surface cracking in early retrieved highly cross-linked polyethylene acetabular liners. J Bone Joint Surg Am.2004;86:1271-82.861271 2004

Halley D, Glassman A, Crowninshield RD. Recurrent dislocation after revision total hip replacement with a large prosthetic femoral head. A case report. J Bone Joint Surg Am.2004;86:827-30.86827 2004

Burroughs BR, Rubash HE, Harris WH. Femoral head sizes larger than 32 mm against highly cross-linked polyethylene. Clin Orthop Relat Res.2002;405:150-7.405150 2002 [CrossRef]

Hermida JC, Bergula A, Chen P, Colwell CW Jr, D'Lima DD. Comparison of the wear rates of twenty-eight and thirty-two-millimeter femoral heads on cross-linked polyethylene acetabular cups in a wear simulator. J Bone Joint Surg Am.2003;85:2325-31.852325 2003

Geller JA, Malchau H, Bragdon C, Greene M, Harris WH, Freiberg AA. Large diameter femoral heads on highly cross-linked polyethylene: minimum 3-year results. Clin Orthop Relat Res.2006;447:53-9.44753 2006 [CrossRef]

Kang JS, Park SR, Ebramzadeh E, Dorr LD. Measurement of polyethylene wear in total hip arthroplasty—accuracy versus ease of use. Yonsei Med J.2003;44:473-8.44473 2003

Ebramzadeh E, Sangiorgio SN, Lattuada F, Kang JS, Chiesa R, McKellop HA, Dorr LD. Accuracy of measurement of polyethylene wear with use of radiographs of total hip replacements. J Bone Joint Surg Am.2003;85:2378-84.852378 2003

Bragdon CR, Martell JM, Greene ME, Estok DM 2nd, Thanner J, Kärrholm J, Harris WH, Malchau H. Comparison of femoral head penetration using RSA and the Martell Method. Clin Orthop Relat Res.2006;448:52-7.44852 2006 [CrossRef]

Livermore J, Ilstrup D, Morrey B. Effect of femoral head size on wear of the polyethylene acetabular component. J Bone Joint Surg Am.1990;72:518-28.72518 1990

Dorr LD, Wan Z. Ten years of experience with porous acetabular components for revision surgery. Clin Orthop Relat Res.1995;319:191-200.319191 1995

Devane PA, Bourne RB, Rorabeck CH, Hardie RM, Horne JG. Measurement of polyethylene wear in metal backed acetabular cups. I. Three-dimensional technique. Clin Orthop Relat Res.1995;319:303-16.319303 1995

Martell JM, Berkson E, Berger R, Jacobs J. Comparison of two and three-dimensional computerized polyethylene wear analysis after total hip arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Am.2003;85:1111-7.851111 2003

Wan Z, Boutary M, Dorr LD. Precision and limitation of measuring two-dimensional wear on clinical radiographs. Clin Orthop Relat Res.2006;449:267-74. Erratum in: Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2006;450:274.449267 2006

Bragdon CR, Estok DM, Malchau H, Kärrholm J, Yuan X, Bourne R, Veldhoven J, Harris WH. Comparison of two digital radiostereometric analysis methods in the determination of femoral head penetration in a total hip replacement phantom. J Orthop Res.2004;22:659-64.22659 2004 [CrossRef]

Bragdon CR, Malchau H, Yuan X, Perinchief R, Karrholm J, Borlin N, Estok DM, Harris WH. Experimental assessment of precision and accuracy of radiostereometric analysis for the determination of polyethylene wear in a total hip replacement model. J Orthop Res.2002;20:688-95.20688 2002 [CrossRef]

Usrey MM, Noble PC, Rudner LJ, Conditt MA, Birman MV, Santore RF, Mathis KB. Does neck/liner impingement increase wear of ultrahigh-molecular-weight polyethylene liners? J Arthroplasty.2006;21(6 Suppl 2):65-71.2165 2006 [CrossRef]

Yamaguchi M, Bauer TW, Hashimoto Y. Deformation of the acetabular polyethylene liner and the backside gap. J Arthroplasty.1999;14:464-9.14464 1999 [CrossRef]

McKellop HA. Wear assessment. In: Callaghan JJ, Rosenberg AG, Rubash HE, editors. The adult hip. Philadelphia: Lippincott-Raven; 1998. p 231-46. 1998

Dowd JE, Sychterz CJ, Young AM, Engh CA. Characterization of long-term femoral-head-penetration rates. Association with and prediction of osteolysis. J Bone Joint Surg Am.2000;82:1102-7.821102 2000

Oparaugo PC, Clarke IC, Malchau H, Herberts P. Correlation of wear debris-induced osteolysis and revision with volumetric wear-rates of polyethylene: a survey of 8 reports in the literature. Acta Orthop Scand.2001;72:22-8.7222 2001 [CrossRef]

Dumbleton JH, Manley MT, Edidin AA. A literature review of the association between wear rate and osteolysis in total hip arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty.2002;17:649-61.17649 2002 [CrossRef]

Ries MD, Scott ML, Jani S. Relationship between gravimetric wear and particle generation in hip simulators: conventional compared with cross-linked polyethylene. J Bone Joint Surg Am.2001;83(Suppl 2 Pt 2):116-22.83116 2001

Bradford L, Kurland R, Sankaran M, Kim H, Pruitt LA, Ries MD. Early failure due to osteolysis associated with contemporary highly cross-linked ultra-high molecular weight polyethylene. A case report. J Bone Joint Surg Am.2004;86:1051-6.861051 2004

Oral E, Wannomae KK, Hawkins N, Harris WH, Muratoglu OK. Alpha-tocopherol-doped irradiated UHMWPE for high fatigue resistance and low wear. Biomaterials.2004;25:5515-22.255515 2004 [CrossRef]

Dumbleton JH, D'Antonio JA, Manley MT, Capello WN, Wang A. The basis for a second-generation highly cross-linked UHMWPE. Clin Orthop Relat Res.2006;453:265-71.453265 2006 [CrossRef]

Röhrl S, Nivbrant B, Mingguo L, Hewitt B. In vivo wear and migration of highly cross-linked polyethylene cups. A radiostereometry analysis study. J Arthroplasty.2005;20:409-13.20409 2005 [CrossRef]

Martell JM, Verner JJ, Incavo SJ. Clinical performance of a highly cross-linked polyethylene at two years in total hip arthroplasty: a randomized prospective trial. J Arthroplasty.2003;18(7 Suppl 1):55-9.1855 2003

Krushell RJ, Fingeroth RJ, Cushing MC. Early femoral head penetration of a highly cross-linked polyethylene liner vs a conventional polyethylene liner. A case controlled study. J Arthroplasty.2005;20(7 Suppl 3):73-6.2073 2005 [CrossRef]

Sychterz CJ, Engh CA Jr, Engh CA. A prospective, randomized clinical study comparing Marathon and Enduron polyethylene acetabular liners: 3 year results. J Arthroplasty.2004;19:258.19258 2004

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;417:126-38.417126 2003

Bragdon CR, Barrett S, Martell JM, Greene ME, Malchau H, Harris WH. Steady-state penetration rates of electron beam-irradiated, highly cross-linked polyethylene at an average 45-month follow-up. J Arthroplasty.2006;21:935-43.21935 2006 [CrossRef]

Hopper RH Jr, Young AM, Orishimo KF, McAuley JP. Correlation between early and late wear rates in total hip arthroplasty with application to the performance of Marathon cross-linked polyethylene liners. J Arthroplasty.2003;18(7 Suppl 1):60-7.1860 2003 [CrossRef]

Topics

hip joint ; osteolysis ; polyethylenes ; hip replacement arthroplasty ; polyethylene ; cross-linking

Username

Password

Access for Patients

Forgot Password?

Have a subscription to the print edition?

Not a Subscriber?

Buy this Article

Get online access for 30 days for $35

New to JBJS?

Subscribe to the online edition for 30 days for $75

Register for a FREE limited account to get full access to all CME activities, to comment on public articles, or to sign up for alerts.

Have a subscription to the print edition?

Current subscribers to The Journal of Bone & Joint Surgery in either the print or quarterly DVD formats receive free online access to JBJS.org.

Activate your online account now

Forgot your password?

Enter your username and email address. We'll send you a reminder to the email address on record.

Username:*

Email Address:*

Forgot your username or need assistance? Please contact customer service at subs@jbjs.org. If your access is provided
by your institution, please contact you librarian or administrator for username and password information. Institutional
administrators, to reset your institution's master username or password, please contact subs@jbjs.org

References

Accreditation Statement

These activities have been planned and implemented in accordance with the Essential Areas and policies of the Accreditation Council for Continuing Medical Education (ACCME) through the joint sponsorship of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons and The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery, Inc. The American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons is accredited by the ACCME to provide continuing medical education for physicians.

CME Activities Associated with This Article

Submit a Comment

Please read the other comments before you post yours. Contributors must reveal any conflict of interest.
Comments are moderated and will appear on the site at the discretion of JBJS editorial staff.

* = Required Field

Comment Author(s) * (if multiple authors, separate names by comma)

Example: John Doe

Affiliation & Institution*

Comment Title*

Comment*

Cancel

Print
PDF
Email

Recipient(s) will receive an email with a link (good for 5 days) to 'Clinical Performance of Highly Cross-Linked Polyethylenes in Total Hip Arthroplasty'.
Your Name:*
Example: John Doe

Email Address:* CC Me:
Enter your valid email address. Example: jdoe@example.com

Recipient's Email Address:*

Separate multiple email address with semi-colons (up to 5).

Subject:* 's The Journal of Bone & Joint Surgery: 'Clinical Performance of Highly Cross-Linked Polyethylenes in Total Hip Arthroplasty'
Subject for your email.

Message:

(Optional, message will truncate at 1000 characters)

Processing your request... Please Wait...

Copyright © in the material you requested is held by The Journal of Bone & Joint Surgery, Inc. (unless otherwise noted). This email ability is provided as a courtesy, and by using it you agree that that you are requesting the material solely for personal, non-commercial use, and that it is subject to Journal of Bone & Joint Surgery, Inc.'s Terms of Use. The information provided in order to email this topic will not be used to send unsolicited email, nor will it be furnished to third parties. Please refer to The Journal of Bone & Joint Surgery Inc.'s Privacy Policy for further information.

Copyright © The Journal of Bone & Joint Surgery Inc. All rights reserved.
Share
Get Citation

Cale A. Jacobs, Christian P. Christensen, A. Seth Greenwald, Harry McKellop; Clinical Performance of Highly Cross-Linked Polyethylenes in Total Hip Arthroplasty. The Journal of Bone & Joint Surgery. 2007 Dec;89(12):2779-2786.

Download citation file:

RIS (Zotero)

EndNote

BibTex

Medlars

ProCite

RefWorks

Reference Manager

Copyright © The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery, Inc.
Rights & Permissions
Article Alerts

Processing your request... Please Wait.
Submit a Comment
Data Supplements