Advertisement

Wear of large Ceramic Bearings

  • Thomas Pandorf
Part of the Ceramics in Orthopaedics book series (CIO)

Abstract

Large diameter ceramic bearings are of increasing interest due to the enlarged range of motion, enhanced stability of the artificial hip joint [1], and reduced risk of dislocations. Larger diameter hard on hard bearings may as well change the wear characteristics due to larger wear areas or different lubrication behaviour from changed diameter tolerances as known from Me-Me large bearings. But not only hard-on-hard bearings are of interest. With new low wear highly cross-linked polyethylene, wear behaviour of large ball heads against XPE liners is in focus.

Three different wear studies were conducted:
  1. 1.

    Ce-Ce: Alumina matrix bearings 40 mm and 44 mm with different diameter tolerances were tested according to DIN EN 14242. Roundness of the ball head and insert as well as clearance of the bearing partners have been varied.

     
  2. 2.

    Ce-XPE: Mean volume change rates have been compared between a 36 mm Biolox® forte ceramic ball head and CoCr ball heads. Both heads articulated against a XPE liner.

     
  3. 3.

    Ce-Ce: 36 mm diameter bearings in microseparation mode with two different ceramic materials were tested, one a pure alumina, the other an alumina matrix composite.

     
The different wear studies show:
  1. 1.

    Large ceramic bearings have a very low wear rate. The influence of the clearance on the wear rate is negligible.

     
  2. 2.

    Using a ceramic ball head against a highly crosslinked polyethylene liner reduces the wear rate by 40% compared to metal ball heads.

     
  3. 3.

    Even in microseparation mode the wear volume is very low compared to other bearing materials. The wear volume is similar to previously performed microseparation wear studies of 28 mm bearings. The wear volume depends on the used combination of the two different bearing materials. The alumina matrix composite (Biolox® delta) has 6 fold less wear when compared with the alumina couple.

     

The superior wear characteristics of large ceramic bearings have been proven in all tribological test setups. The use of ceramics in a hip replacement will significantly reduce the risk of particle induced osteolysis leading to an increased longevity in the human body.

Keywords

Wear Rate Alumina Matrix Wear Volume Alumina Matrix Composite Ceramic Head 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Ceroni Giacometti R, Dalla Pria P. The Development of Large Ceramic Heads to Obtain More Stable THA Wider Range of Motion. A. Toni, G. Willmann (eds.): Bioceramics in Joint Arthroplasty. 6th BIOLOX® Symposium Proceedings. Georg Thieme Verlag, Stuttgart, New York, 2001:11–12.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Clarke, I. C., V. Good, L. Anissan, A. Gustafson, Charnley wear model for validation of hip simulator–ball diameter vs. polytetrafluoroethylene and polyethylene wear. Proc. Instn. Mech. Engrs. 211 Part H (1997) 25–36.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Clarke, I. C., A. G. N. Gustafson, A. Fujisawa, H. Jung; Effect of Femoral-Head Diameter on Polyethylene Wear Rates in Vitro. Seite 301 in: Final Program AAOS New Orleans, LA 1994.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Saikko, V. Wear of Alumina on Alumina Total Replacement Hip Joints Studies with a Hip Joint Simulator, 2nd Biolox Symposium.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Hendrich C, Goebel S, Roller C, Sauer U, Kirschner S, Schmitz H, Eulert J, Martell JM. In-vivo Wear Rate of Ceramic Heads with Diameters of 28 mm and 32 mm. J.P. Garino, G. Willmann (eds.): Bioceramics in Joint Arthroplasty. 7th BIOLOX® Symposium Proceedings. Georg Thieme Verlag, Stuttgart, New York, 2002: 89–93.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Campbell P, Shen Fu-Wen; Mc Kellop H. Biologic and Tribologic Consideration of Alternative Bearing Surfaces. Clin Orthop 2004; 418: 98–111.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Böhler M, Mayr G, Goria O, Frank E, Mühlbauer M, Salzer M. Ergebnisse mit der Keramik-Keramik-Gleitpaarung in der Hüftendoprothetik. W. Puhl (ed.): Die Keramikpaarung BIOLOX in der Hüftendoprothetik. 1st BIOLOX® Symposium Proceedings. Georg Thieme Verlag, Stuttgart, New York, 1996: 34–38.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Hannouche D, Hamadouche M, Nizard R, Bizot P, Meunier A, Sedel L. Ceramics in Total Hip Replacement. Clin Orthop Rel Res 2005, 430: 62–71.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Clarke IC, Manaka M, Shishido T, Oonishi H, Gustafson GA, Boehler M. Tribological and Material Properties for all-Alumina THR–Convergence with Clinical Retrieval Data. H. Zippel, M. Dietrich (eds.): Ceramics in Orthopaedics. 8th BIOLOX® Symposium Proceedings. Steinkopff-Verlag, Darmstadt 2003: 3–17.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Dowson D, Hardaker C, Flett M, Isaac GH. A Hip Joint Simulator Study of the Performance of Metal-on-; Metal Joints. Part II: Design. J Arthroplasty 2004;19(9) Suppl 3: 124–130.PubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Steinkopff Verlag 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  • Thomas Pandorf
    • 1
  1. 1.Medical Products DivisionCeramTec AGPlochingenGermany

Personalised recommendations