HOJ-2003 v7

William H. Harris, M.D. Alan Gerry Clinical Professor of Orthopaedic Surgery Director of Orthopaedic Biomechanics and Biomaterials Laboratory Massachusetts General Hospital 55 Fruit Street, GRJ 1126 Boston, MA 02114 (617) 724-0526 (voice) (617) 726-3883 (fax) [email protected] INTRODUCTION A widely held concept suggests that there is an acceptable threshold, or lower limit, of particle generation at the articulation in total hip arthroplasty (THA) below which periprosthetic osteolysis following total hip replacement surgery is minimal or does not occur, the so-called “lysis threshold”. Such a concept might provide guidance in assessing to what extent improvement needs to be made in reducing the adhesive/abrasive wear of ultra high molecular weight polyethylene for total hip arthroplasty. The corollary of this idea is that the aim of improving the wear resistance of ultra high molecular weight polyethylene for total hip arthroplasty simply should try to maintain the particle generation below this threshold. Studies from Wroblewski and Siney (1), Sochart (2), Dowd et al. (3), and Mckellop (4) appear to support this concept. Dumbleton and coauthors (5) conclude “for practical purposes, we suggest that a hip bearing wear rate of 0.1mm per year can be taken as a wear threshold for polyethylene: below this level, osteolysis is rare and above this level, the risk of osteolysis increases substantially.” For example, Wroblewski’s data from 1342 hips show that at an average 10.3 year follow-up, those patients whose calculated average annual “wear” rate was 0.1mm per year or less had a 3.9% incidence of acetabular migration. If the annual femoral head penetration rate was between 0.1 and 0.2mm per year, the incidence of acetabular migration was 16.7%. This study, as well as in Sochart’s report (2) of patients under the age of 40 at the time of their total hip replacement, showed that more wear is worse. Other data also show that more wear is worse but that may not be the issue. The lysis threshold concept examines a different issue. It examines the low wear end of the spectrum, not the high end. Further analysis of this apparently appealing concept, however, raises 5 serious concerns about the validity of the concept. The first issue is that many of the studies that appear to support this concept have a duration of follow-up that is too short. The studies reported by Wroblewski and Siney (1) and by Dowd et al. (3) cover only 10 years. It is well known that the incidence of lysis increases with increasing time. Ten years is too short. To make a decision on the basis of 10-years of followup ignores the important facts that most patients undergoing total hip replacement have life expectancies much longer than 10 years and that lysis increases with time. Secondly, lysis does occur patients whose penetration rate was 0.1mm per year or less. Sochart (2) found at 19.5 years of follow-up, of his cases with the lowest wear (100 microns or less per year), 9% of the patients had lysis. In the report by Wroblewski’s group (1) only one group was free of socket migration, the group with “no measurable wear”, not the group with wear of 0.1 mm/year. Thirdly, some reports used a limited definition of periprosthetic osteolysis. They did not include the type of lysis shown by our finding (6) that periprosthetic osteolysis is the cause of radiolucent zones at the interface between cement and the acetabular bone. This linear form of periprosthetic osteolysis leads loosening of cemented acetabular components. If cases such as these with loss of fixation because of retroacetabular linear lysis are not included in the definition of lysis, the data are misleading and erroneous. Fourthly, plain radiography has serious limitations as the diagnostic endpoint to define lysis, as recently shown by Puri et al. (8). Helical computer tomography for the assessment of acetabular osteolysis following total hip replacement was compared to plain radiography in a group of patients who had wellfixed, cementless total hip replacements. Plain radiography detected lysis in 32% of the hips, but 52% showed evidence of osteolysis on the helical computerized tomography. Plain films grossly underestimate the true incidence of lysis. Our fifth concern regarding the concept of a “lysis threshold” is the important observation that factors other than wear can play a major role in the incidence of osteolysis. The strong role of other factors was clear from the matched pair series report by Goetz et al. (12). In that study the prevalence of femoral osteolysis in hips with the Harris-Galante (HG, Zimmer, Warsaw, IN) cementless femoral components was compared to those with cemented femoral components. The patients were matched by age, sex, weight, duration of follow-up head size, polyethylene thickness and diagnosis. The acetabular component and the polyethylene were the same for both groups. All of the arthroplasties were performed by the same surgeon and were followed for a mean period of 6 years (minimum 4 years).