PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the long-term clinical and radiographic outcomes of the Balgrist total hip replacement cup. METHODS: We report the results of a retrospective review of 195 total hip prostheses with Balgrist cup implanted in 178 patients. There were 59 men and 119 women with a mean age at surgery of 52.3 years (range, 19-72). Cox regression was used to determine the influence of independent variables on the survivorship of the prosthesis. RESULTS: There were 117 (66 %) of 178 patients, and 131 (67 %) of 195 hips available for assessment at a mean follow-up of 17.4 years. A total of 21 patients (22 hips) were lost from follow-up (12 %). A total of 25 patients (27 hips) required some type of re-operation during the follow-up period. Eight of 27 re-operations (30 %) were directly caused by the Balgrist cup failure due to fatigue fracture of the metallic shell (n = 5; 19 %), polyethylene wear (n = 2; 7 %) and aseptic loosening (n = 1; 4 %). The mean polyethylene wear rate was 0.068 mm/year (range, 0.008-0.230; SD = 0.043). The risk of re-operation for any reason was decreased with dysplastic hip as a primary diagnosis (hazard ratio; HR = 0.250; 95 % CI 0.086-0.725) and with greater age at the time of surgery (HR = 0.923; 95 % CI 0.880-0.969). The 19-year survivorship with re-operation for any reason was 75.6 % (95 % CI 67.0-84.2). The 19-year survivorship with re-operation for the Balgrist cup failure was 90.5 % (95 % CI 83.4-97.6). CONCLUSIONS: The Balgrist cup continues to provide excellent clinical and radiological outcomes. This is associated at least in part with a low polyethylene wear rate. The main reason for the Balgrist cup failure is fatigue fracture of the metallic shell.

Department of Orthopaedics Faculty of Medicine and Dentistry Palacky University Olomouc University Hospital 1 P Pavlova 6 77520 Olomouc Czech Republic

Zobrazit více v PubMed

Franklin PD, Allison JJ, Ayers DC. Beyond joint implant registries: a patient-centered research consortium for comparative effectiveness in total joint replacement. JAMA. 2012;308:1217–1218. doi: 10.1001/jama.2012.12568. PubMed DOI PMC

Beswick AD, Wylde V, Gooberman-Hill R, et al. What proportion of patients report long-term pain after total hip or knee replacement for osteoarthritis? A systematic review of prospective studies in unselected patients. BMJ Open. 2012;2:e000435. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2011-000435. PubMed DOI PMC

Clement ND, Biant LC, Breusch SJ. Total hip arthroplasty: to cement or not to cement the acetabular socket? A critical review of the literature. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 2012;132:411–427. doi: 10.1007/s00402-011-1422-2. PubMed DOI

Gallo J, Langova K, Havranek V, et al. Poor survival of ABG I hip prosthesis in younger patients. Biomed Pap Med Fac Univ Palacky Olomouc Czech Repub. 2008;152:163–168. doi: 10.5507/bp.2008.027. PubMed DOI

Hailer NP, Garellick G, Karrholm J. Uncemented and cemented primary total hip arthroplasty in the Swedish Hip Arthroplasty Register. Acta Orthop. 2010;81:34–41. doi: 10.3109/17453671003685400. PubMed DOI PMC

Makela KT, Eskelinen A, Pulkkinen P, et al. Results of 3,668 primary total hip replacements for primary osteoarthritis in patients under the age of 55 years. Acta Orthop. 2011;82:521–529. doi: 10.3109/17453674.2011.618908. PubMed DOI PMC

Morshed S, Bozic KJ, Ries MD, et al. Comparison of cemented and uncemented fixation in total hip replacement: a meta-analysis. Acta Orthop. 2007;78:315–326. doi: 10.1080/17453670710013861. PubMed DOI

Wroblewski BM, Siney PD, Fleming PA. Charnley low-frictional torque arthroplasty: follow-up for 30 to 40 years. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2009;91:447–450. doi: 10.2106/JBJS.H.00034. PubMed DOI

Van Der Veen HC, Van Jonbergen HP, Poolman RW, et al. Is there evidence for accelerated polyethylene wear in uncemented compared to cemented acetabular components? A systematic review of the literature. Int Orthop. 2013;37:9–14. doi: 10.1007/s00264-012-1738-8. PubMed DOI PMC

Harris WH. The first 50 years of total hip arthroplasty: lessons learned. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2009;467:28–31. doi: 10.1007/s11999-008-0467-1. PubMed DOI PMC

Pokorny D, Slouf M, Fulin P. Current knowledge on the effect of technology and sterilization on the structure, properties and longevity of UHMWPE in total joint replacement. Acta Chir Orthop Traumatol Cech. 2012;79:213–221. PubMed

Rimnac C, Pruitt L, Implant Wear Symposium Engineering Work Group How do material properties influence wear and fracture mechanisms? J Am Acad Orthop Surg. 2008;16(Suppl 1):S94–S100. PubMed

Santavirta S, Goodman SB. Total hip replacement: a successful interaction of biology, mechanics, and materials science. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2005;430:2. doi: 10.1097/01.blo.0000150100.14850.7a. PubMed DOI

Jacob HA, Hilfiker B. The self-locking Balgrist hip socket for cement-free fixation—history of its development and clinical experience to date. Z Orthop Ihre Grenzgeb. 1990;128:254–261. doi: 10.1055/s-2008-1039990. PubMed DOI

Echtler B, Jacob HA, Houweling M, et al. 8-year survivorship analysis and subjective results of 687 primary Balgrist hip sockets. Acta Orthop Belg. 1999;65:346–356. PubMed

Ishaque BA, Basad E, Gils J, et al. Long-term results of the cementless conical Balgrist expansion cup—comparison analysis to the Zweymuller-Alloclassic screw cup. Z Orthop Unfall. 2009;147:707–715. doi: 10.1055/s-0029-1185919. PubMed DOI

Pakvis D, Van Hellemondt G, De Visser E, et al. Is there evidence for a superior method of socket fixation in hip arthroplasty? A systematic review. Int Orthop. 2011;35:1109–1118. doi: 10.1007/s00264-011-1234-6. PubMed DOI PMC

Harris WH. Traumatic arthritis of the hip after dislocation and acetabular fractures: treatment by mold arthroplasty. An end-result study using a new method of result evaluation. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1969;51:737–755. PubMed

Zahiri CA, Schmalzried TP, Szuszczewicz ES, et al. Assessing activity in joint replacement patients. J Arthroplast. 1998;13:890–895. doi: 10.1016/S0883-5403(98)90195-4. PubMed DOI

Charnley J. The long-term results of low-friction arthroplasty of the hip performed as a primary intervention. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1972;54:61–76. PubMed

Pagnano W, Hanssen AD, Lewallen DG, et al. The effect of superior placement of the acetabular component on the rate of loosening after total hip arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1996;78:1004–1014. PubMed

Engh CA, Massin P, Suthers KE. Roentgenographic assessment of the biologic fixation of porous-surfaced femoral components. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1990;257:107–128. PubMed

Massin P, Schmidt L, Engh CA. Evaluation of cementless acetabular component migration. An experimental study. J Arthroplasty. 1989;4:245–251. doi: 10.1016/S0883-5403(89)80020-8. PubMed DOI

Delee JG, Charnley J. Radiological demarcation of cemented sockets in total hip replacement. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1976;121:20–32. PubMed

Gruen TA, Mcneice GM, Amstutz HC. "Modes of failure" of cemented stem-type femoral components: a radiographic analysis of loosening. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1979;141:17–27. PubMed

Gallo J, Havranek V, Zapletalova J. Risk factors for accelerated polyethylene wear and osteolysis in ABG I total hip arthroplasty. Int Orthop. 2010;34:19–26. doi: 10.1007/s00264-009-0731-3. PubMed DOI PMC

Dorr LD, Wan Z. Ten years of experience with porous acetabular components for revision surgery. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1995;319:191–200. PubMed

Rowden NJ, Harrison JA, Graves SE, et al. Loss to follow-up after arthroplasty: a new use for registry data. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2012;94:493–496. PubMed

Lachiewicz PF, Soileau ES. Second-generation modular acetabular components provide fixation at 10 to 16 years. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2012;470:366–372. doi: 10.1007/s11999-011-1950-7. PubMed DOI PMC

Suckel A, Geiger F, Kinzl L, et al. Long-term results for the uncemented Zweymuller/Alloclassic hip endoprosthesis. A 15-year minimum follow-up of 320 hip operations. J Arthroplasty. 2009;24:846–853. doi: 10.1016/j.arth.2008.03.021. PubMed DOI

Terre RA. Estimated survival probability of the Spotorno total hip arthroplasty after a 15- to 21-year follow-up: one surgeon’s results. Hip Int. 2010;20(Suppl 7):70–78. PubMed

Laupacis A, Bourne R, Rorabeck C, et al. Comparison of total hip arthroplasty performed with and without cement: a randomized trial. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2002;84:1823–1828. PubMed

Rorabeck CH, Bourne RB, Laupacis A, et al. A double-blind study of 250 cases comparing cemented with cementless total hip arthroplasty. Cost-effectiveness and its impact on health-related quality of life. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1994;298:156–164. PubMed

Corten K, Bourne RB, Charron KD, et al. What works best, a cemented or cementless primary total hip arthroplasty? Minimum 17-year followup of a randomized controlled trial. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2011;469:209–217. doi: 10.1007/s11999-010-1459-5. PubMed DOI PMC

Martín-Guinea J, Álvarez-Gonzáles P, Nieva-Navarro F. Analysis of 10-year survival rates for 100 cementless Balgrist cups in primary hip prostheses. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2004;86:141.

Rozkydal Z, Janicek P, Tomas T, et al. Long-term results of the CLS acetabular cup in primary total hip replacement. Acta Chir Orthop Traumatol Cech. 2009;76:90–97. PubMed

Dottl C, Steinhauser E, Koch U, et al. Fractures of cementless thin-walled cups. J Arthroplasty. 2006;21:144–147. doi: 10.1016/j.arth.2005.04.012. PubMed DOI

Gallo J, Goodman SB, Konttinen YT, et al. Particle disease: Biologic mechanisms of periprosthetic osteolysis in total hip arthroplasty. Innate Immun. 2013;19:213–224. doi: 10.1177/1753425912451779. PubMed DOI PMC

Gallo J, Goodman SB, Lostak J, et al. Advantages and disadvantages of ceramic on ceramic total hip arthroplasty: a review. Biomed Pap Med Fac Univ Palacky Olomouc Czech Repub. 2012;156:204–212. doi: 10.5507/bp.2012.063. PubMed DOI

Shetty V, Shitole B, Shetty G, et al. Optimal bearing surfaces for total hip replacement in the young patient: a meta-analysis. Int Orthop. 2011;35:1281–1287. doi: 10.1007/s00264-010-1104-7. PubMed DOI PMC

Battenberg AK, Hopkins JS, Kupiec AD, et al. The 2012 Frank Stinchfield Award: Decreasing patient activity with aging: implications for crosslinked polyethylene wear. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2013;471:386–392. doi: 10.1007/s11999-012-2497-y. PubMed DOI PMC

Kinkel S, Wollmerstedt N, Kleinhans JA, et al. Patient activity after total hip arthroplasty declines with advancing age. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2009;467:2053–2058. doi: 10.1007/s11999-009-0756-3. PubMed DOI PMC

Schmalzried TP, Shepherd EF, Dorey FJ, et al. The John Charnley Award. Wear is a function of use, not time. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2000;381:36–46. doi: 10.1097/00003086-200012000-00005. PubMed DOI

Schmalzried TP, Szuszczewicz ES, Northfield MR, et al. Quantitative assessment of walking activity after total hip or knee replacement. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1998;80:54–59. doi: 10.1302/0301-620X.80B1.7739. PubMed DOI

Romano CL, Frigo C, Randelli G, et al. Analysis of the gait of adults who had residua of congenital dysplasia of the hip. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1996;78:1468–1479. PubMed

Gould VC, Blom AW, Wylde V. Long-term patient-reported outcomes after total hip replacement: comparison to the general population. Hip Int. 2012;22:160–165. doi: 10.5301/HIP.2012.9230. PubMed DOI

Roder C, Staub LP, Eichler P, et al. Avoiding misclassification bias with the traditional Charnley classification: rationale for a fourth Charnley class BB. J Orthop Res. 2006;24:1803–1808. doi: 10.1002/jor.20224. PubMed DOI

Sheffler LC, Yoo B, Bhandari M, et al. Observational studies in orthopaedic surgery: the STROBE statement as a tool for transparent reporting. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2013;95:e112–e141. doi: 10.2106/JBJS.L.00484. PubMed DOI

Joshi AB, Gill GS, Smith PL. Outcome in patients lost to follow-up. J Arthroplasty. 2003;18:149–153. doi: 10.1054/arth.2003.50061. PubMed DOI