The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery (American). 2005;87:326-331.
doi:10.2106/JBJS.C.01308
© 2005 The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery, Inc.
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow CME: Take the exams for this article:
 CME 1: January, February, March 2005
Adult Knee Reconstruction Test 8: Spring 2005
Right arrow [Supplementary Material]
Right arrow Letters to the Editor: Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when Letters to the Editor are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow E-mail this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My File Cabinet
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowReprints and Permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Conditt, M. A.
Right arrow Articles by Noble, P. C.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Conditt, M. A.
Right arrow Articles by Noble, P. C.
Related Collections
Right arrow Adult Knee
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Technorati  
What's this?

Backside Wear of Polyethylene Tibial Inserts: Mechanism and Magnitude of Material Loss

Michael A. Conditt, PhD1, Matthew T. Thompson, MS1, Molly M. Usrey, BS1, Sabir K. Ismaily, BS1 and Philip C. Noble, PhD2

1 Institute of Orthopedic Research and Education, 6550 Fannin, Suite 2512, Houston, TX 77030. E-mail address for M.A. Conditt: mconditt{at}bcm.tmc.edu
2 Barnhart Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Baylor College of Medicine, 6550 Fannin, Suite 2625, Houston, TX 77030

Investigation performed at the Institute of Orthopedic Research and Education, Houston, Texas

A commentary is available with the electronic versions of this article, on our web site (www.jbjs.org) and on our quarterly CD-ROM (call our subscription department, at 781-449-9780, to order the CD-ROM).

The authors did not receive grants or outside funding in support of their research or preparation of this manuscript. They did not receive payments or other benefits or a commitment or agreement to provide such benefits from a commercial entity. No commercial entity paid or directed, or agreed to pay or direct, any benefits to any research fund, foundation, educational institution, or other charitable or nonprofit organization with which the authors are affiliated or associated.

Background: Wear of the underside of modular tibial inserts (backside wear) in total knee replacements has been reported by several authors. Although, for some implant designs, this phenomenon seems to contribute to osteolysis, the actual volume of material lost through wear of the backside surface has not been quantified. This study describes the results of computerized measurements of tibial inserts of one design known to be associated with a high prevalence of backside wear in situ.

Methods: A series of retrieved total knee components of one design were examined. The duration of implantation of the retrieved components ranged from thirty-six to 146 months. Laser surface profilometry and computer-aided design software were used to develop individual three-dimensional models of each worn, retrieved tibial insert to compare with scanned unused inserts. Volumetric subtraction of both models revealed the material lost because of backside wear.

Results: Worn and unworn areas on the backside surface were easily identified by stereomicroscopy and laser profilometry. The computer reconstructions showed that, in all retrievals, all unworn surfaces on the nonarticulating surface lay in one plane. The average volume (and standard deviation) of the material lost because of backside wear was 925 ± 637 mm3 (range, 197 to 2720 mm3). On the basis of the time in situ for each implant, the average volumetric wear rate was 138 ± 95 mm3/yr.

Conclusions: The predicted volume of material removed because of backside wear is substantial and may be sufficient to induce osteolysis. Our results suggest that peg-like protrusions are not generated by the extrusion of polyethylene into screw-holes within the base-plate but by abrasion of the underside of the bearing insert, leaving the protruding pegs as the only remnants of the original surface.

Clinical Relevance: This study provides quantitative predictive data supporting previous qualitative studies showing that backside wear is an important and relevant damage mechanism in contemporary designs of knee replacements and may produce substantial volumes of wear debris.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Technorati Technorati    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 J Am Acad Orthop SurgHome page
A. K. Tsao, L. C. Jones, and D. G. Lewallen
What patient and surgical factors contribute to implant wear and osteolysis in total joint arthroplasty?
J. Am. Acad. Ortho. Surg., July 1, 2008; 16(suppl_1): S7 - S13.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 J Am Acad Orthop SurgHome page
D. D.R. Naudie, D. J. Ammeen, G. A. Engh, and C. H. Rorabeck
Wear and Osteolysis Around Total Knee Arthroplasty
J. Am. Acad. Ortho. Surg., January 1, 2007; 15(1): 53 - 64.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 JBJSHome page
M. J. Archibeck and R. E. White Jr.
What's New in Adult Reconstructive Knee Surgery
J. Bone Joint Surg. Am., July 1, 2006; 88(7): 1677 - 1686.
[Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 JBJSHome page
M. B. Collier, C. A. Engh Jr., J. P. Mcauley, S. D. Ginn, and G. A. Engh
Osteolysis After Total Knee Arthroplasty: Influence of Tibial Baseplate Surface Finish and Sterilization of Polyethylene Insert. Findings at Five to Ten Years Postoperatively
J. Bone Joint Surg. Am., December 1, 2005; 87(12): 2702 - 2708.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]