Polyethylene manufacturing characteristics have a major effect on the risk of revision surgery in cementless and hybrid total hip arthroplasties

Abstract

Aims The aim of this study was to identify the effect of the manufacturing characteristics of polyethylene acetabular liners on the survival of cementless and hybrid total hip arthroplasty (THA). Methods Prospective cohort study using linked National Joint Registry (NJR) and manufacturer data. The primary endpoint was revision for aseptic loosening. Cox proportional hazard regression was the primary analytical approach. Manufacturing variables included resin type, crosslinking radiation dose, terminal sterilization method, terminal sterilization radiation dose, stabilization treatment, total radiation dose, packaging, and face asymmetry. Total radiation dose was further divided into G1 (no radiation), G2 (> 0 Mrad to < 5 Mrad), G3 (≥ 5 Mrad to < 10 Mrad), and G4 (≥ 10 Mrad). Results A total of 5,329 THAs were revised, 1,290 of which were due to aseptic loosening. Total radiation dose, face asymmetry, and stabilization treatments were found to significantly affect implant survival. G1 had the highest revision risk for any reason and for aseptic loosening and G3 and G4 the lowest. Compared with G1, the adjusted hazard ratio for G2 was 0.74 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.64 to 0.86), G3 was 0.36 (95% CI 0.30 to 0.43), and G4 was 0.38 (95% CI 0.31 to 0.47). The cumulative incidence of revision for aseptic loosening at 12 years was 0.52 and 0.54 per 100 THAs for G3 and G4, respectively, compared with 1.95 per 100 THAs in G1. Asymmetrical liners had a lower revision risk due to aseptic loosening and reasons other than aseptic loosening compared with symmetric (flat) liners. In G3 and G4, stabilization with vitamin E and heating above melting point performed best. Conclusion Polyethylene liners with a total radiation dose of ≥ 5 Mrad, an asymmetrical liner face, and stabilization with heating above the melting point demonstrate best survival. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2020;102-B(1):90–101