Wear Rate of Highly Cross-Linked Polyethylene in Total Hip Arthroplasty
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Background: Highly cross-linked polyethylene was introduced for clinical use in total hip arthroplasty with the expectation that it would exhibit less wear when compared with conventional polyethylene. The purpose of this study was to report the clinical and radiographic results, after a minimum of five years of follow-up, of a randomized, blinded, controlled trial comparing a conventional polyethylene with a first-generation highly cross-linked polyethylene. Methods: One hundred patients were enrolled in a prospective, randomized controlled study comparing highly cross-linked and conventional polyethylene acetabular liners in total hip arthroplasty. Fifty patients were in each group. At the time of follow-up, clinical outcomes were assessed and steady-state femoral head penetration rates (after bedding-in) for each patient were calculated with use of a validated radiographic technique. In addition, a statistical comparison of polyethylene wear between groups was performed with use of generalized estimating equations. Results: At a mean of 6.8 years postoperatively, there were no differences between the two polyethylene groups with regard to the Harris hip score, Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC), or Short Form-12 (SF-12) score. The mean femoral head penetration rate in the first through fifth years was found to be significantly lower in the group treated with the highly cross-linked polyethylene (0.003 mm/yr [95% confidence interval, ±0.027]) than it was in the group treated with conventional polyethylene (0.051 mm/yr [95% confidence interval, ±0.022]) (p = 0.006). Men treated with a conventional polyethylene liner had a significantly higher (p ≤ 0.012) femoral head penetration rate (0.081 mm/yr [95% confidence interval, ±0.065]) than both men and women with a highly cross-linked liner (−0.013 mm/yr [95% confidence interval, ±0.074] and 0.009 mm/yr [95% confidence interval, ±0.028], respectively). The general estimating equations demonstrated that the group with a highly cross-linked polyethylene liner had a significantly lower femoral head penetration rate than the group with a conventional polyethylene liner (p = 0.025), and a significantly higher femoral head penetration rate was demonstrated in men with a conventional polyethylene liner when compared with both men and women with a highly cross-linked liner (p = 0.003). Conclusions: At a minimum of five years postoperatively, the steady-state femoral head penetration rate associated with this first-generation highly cross-linked polyethylene liner was significantly lower than that associated with a conventional polyethylene liner. Long-term follow-up is required to demonstrate the clinical benefit of this new material. Level of Evidence: Therapeutic Level I. See Instructions to Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,003 | 0,006 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».