|
POLYETHYLENE
FOR TOTAL
JOINTS
HOME
CONTENTS
Material - polymerization
Wear of polyethylene
The cross-linking of polyethylene
Sterilization with gas plasma
The clinical efficacy of
cross-linked cups
Shelf-life
Polyethylene
liner
fracture
Polyethylene
doped
with
E-vitamin
Allergy to polyethylene
AAOS
page
1
Material
 |
Ultra- High Molecular Weight PolyEthylene
(UHMWPE) is the current material of choice for use as a bearing surface in total joint
prostheses.
Total joints with components made of this
material can function for more than twenty years if they are well designed and well
implanted.
However, there is a growing body of evidence
showing that wear particles worn off the surface of UHMWPE component may trigger
destruction (osteolysis) of the skeleton around the total joint and eventually cause a
failure of the whole total joint.
Thus,
the
material
scientists
and
surgeon
work
feverishly
to
improve
the
characteristics
of the
material
|
|
Biomet's
adverizement
for
Hylamer
TM
PolyEthylene
in
1991
the
product
failed
later |
Polymerization
Polyethylene is an organic compound formed by
long repeating chains of a single substance: the molecules of the gaseous substance
ethylene.

PICTURE
of polymerization of polyethylene
(brown
large balls are carbon atoms,
small blue balls are
hydrogen atoms)
click on the icon for a full size image
In a polymerization process the single
ethylene molecule, called mer, is added to another ethylene mer. When many such ethylene
meres are added together, they form an extremely long, chained molecule called generally
polymer (Literary "polymer" = many meres). In the case of ethylene the final
product of many ethylene molecules chained together is accordingly called polyethylene.
The mechanical properties of polyethylene
improve slowly with rising molecular weight of the product. A dramatic change in
mechanical properties, however, appears when molecular weight of the polyethylene molecule
exceeds one million. This appears when more than 35 000 ethylene groups are added
together. Such product is called Ultra- High Molecular Weight PolyEthylene. The molecular
weight of the UHMWPE currently used in total joint components varies between 4 to 6
millions. Every such UHMWPE molecule is composed of 160 to 215 000 ethylene groups.
The standard UHMWPE with this molecular weight
is an extremely tough and yet flexible material. To date it has proven to be the best
polymer material for use in total joints.
1a
Wear of polyethylene
Despite its superior mechanical performance,
the standard UHMWPE is not a perfect material. It is subject to fatigue failure and it
produces to many wear particles. It can also absorb small amounts of fluids or retain
small amounts of air in the microscopically small pores (about 0,1 volume percent). This
is a small amount but it may cause great deterioration of the material during the long
years in the patients body..
First now the scientist and surgeons are
searching for a UHMWPE material with better wear resistance, although the UHMWPE has been
used since the 1960s,. The reason for the lack of interest in the past has been low
demand for the surgical grade UHMWPE The industry estimated in 1993 that only 0.1% of the
worlds annual production of this material has been used for production of total
joints. Current estimates are difficult to obtain, but available figures show that the
figure is still
lower than 2 %.
The main problem of the UHMWPE is wear. The
wear of currently used polyethylene is
usually not large enough to disturb the mechanical function
of the polyethylene cups and knee components.
The main problem is production of war
particles from the UHMWPE surfaces. The wear particles enhance inflammatory reaction and
eventually
lead
to development of osteolysis (bone dissolving disease).
All new developments of UHMWPE have as a goal
production of a material that will be resistant to wear - that will produce only few wear
particles
The recently introduced new UHMWPE materials
include:
The cross-linked product
New methods of sterilization of the
product.
2
The cross-linking of the polyethylene.
The cross-linked UHMWPE has been introduced in
clinical practice in 1998, although it was known since 1960s that irradiation of
UHMWPE increases its wear resistance. In the process called cross-linking, the irradiation
"glues" the long polyethylene molecules to keep together.
There is also a
chemical method of crosslinking the UHMWPE,
used
for
commercial
polyethylene
products
on
large
scale.
This
much
more
simple
and
cheaper
method
of
crosslinking
is not used for
crosslinking
of "medical
grades"
polyethylene
for
economical
reasons.
The
industry
does
not
wish
to
incur
the
costs
of new
comprehensive
tests
to
prove
the
biological
tolerance
of
chemically
crosslinked
polyethylene.
For
polyethylene
crosslinked
by
irradiation
such
tests
are
not
necessary
- all
currently
used
polyethylene
has
been
sterilized
by
irradiation
which
according
to
current
laws
suffices
as
proof
that
irradiation
used
for
crosslinking
does
not
change
the
biological
tolerance
of the
crosslinked
product
(irradiated
perhaps
5
times
more).
This
is one
of the
many
examples
of
curious
mix of
laws
and
economy
that
rules
the
development
of
total
joints.

PICTURE
of cross-linking of the UHMWPE
The mechanism of cross-linking is the
following: The irradiation knocks an electron out of the Hydrogen atom. The Hydrogen atoms
then wander out of the polyethylene molecule as free radicals (blue balls with red hats
in the picture). This happens simultaneously on several places in several UHMWPE; the
carbon atoms that are lacking theirs Hydrogen neighbors keep "free hands" out to
find a new neighbor.
The opposite "free hands" in two
molecules meet and cross-link one UHMWPE molecule to another on several places. The degree
of cross-linking increases with the dose of absorbed irradiation.
If you like it, you may compare the
cross-linking process to cooling of a plate of warm spaghetti.

PICTURE:
cross-linking the spaghetti
The plate of warm spaghetti looks like a
couple of conventional UHMWPE molecules. They are movable; "scratch with a fork"
will easily move spaghetti strings out of plate.
Now put the spaghetti plate to cool. The cool
spaghetti coalesce into one unmovable mass, you cannot remove individual strings with a
fork. The cold thus cross-linked the spaghetti to a "wear resistant mass".
The wear resistance of irradiated material in
a hip simulator is dependent on the irradiation dose:
4 Mrad the maximal
radiation dose used for sterilization of the material produces 80% reduction of wear in
the irradiated UHMWPE
10 Mrad the maximal
dose used for cross-linking of the UHMWPE by some manufacturers causes 95% reduction of
wear in the irradiated UHMWPE.
Further reduction of the last 5% of wear is
then difficult to achieve.
Initial research studied done in the 1970's
studied the changes of the mechanical characteristics in the irradiated UHMWPE immediately
after irradiation. These old reports showed that UHMWPE may a absorb up to 100Mrad, before
it becomes brittle and unusable for mechanical applications.
Modern studies, however, demonstrated that
irradiated UHMWPE ages much quicker than the conventional product, even if the irradiated
UHMWPE is maintained in oxygen-free atmosphere. Studies demonstrated that after 5.5
years, the UHMWPE irradiated with only 2.5 Mrad (sterilization dose) becomes brittle, even
if irradiated in oxygen-free atmosphere.(Deng 2001).
This kind of behavior, if it realizes in cups
made from the highly cross-linked UHMWPE, would be detrimental.
Oxidation damage
The irradiation has deleterious effects on the
UHMWPE capacity to withstand oxidation. The damage by oxidation depends on the radiation
dose. Already the dose used for the sterilization of the material makes the UHMWPE
susceptible to oxidation damage
The mechanism of this damage is the following:
Irradiation of UHMWPE produces not only cross-links, but also free Hydrogen atoms. These
free atoms (free radicals) combine with oxygen and both together are shredding the
very long UHMWPE molecule into shorter slices. Already small concentration of free
radicals in combination with oxygen make great damage, as appears from this example.
An UHMWPE with a molecular weight of 4, 000
000 molecular weight consists of 575 000 bonds between individual carbon atoms. It
suffices if the oxidation severs only 25 of these bonds. One long UHMWPE molecule then
changes into several molecules of
"high-density polyethylene", a product with
relatively
low
molecular
weight
(<
1
million)
and high wear
rates.
The practical solution to the problem how to
stem the oxidation of HMWPE is simple. You may prohibit the contact of the cross-linked
UHMWPE with oxygen (in the air) or chase away the free radical scoundrels from it.
Theoretically you may prohibit the contact
between irradiated, cross-linked UHMWPE cup and oxygen by packing the cup component in
airtight box, with atmosphere of nitrogen. Not feasible in practice, because when you take
the cup out of the inert atmosphere in the airtight package and place it into the
the body, it would be bathed in body fluids containing solved oxygen.
So the more secure route is chasing out the
scoundrels the free hydrogen atoms - to find a new place. This is best done by
reheating the irradiated product to melting point. All molecules begin to move
and the freely wandering scoundrels will find a new place in the crystal lattice
somewhere between them.
This is the way the industry uses today.
The modern highly cross-linked UHMWPE is
first cross-linked by irradiation
(with doses between 5 to 10 Mrad),
then heated close to
melting point.
the component made from this highly
cross-linked UHMWPE is then finally
packaged without access of air.
But these products, wrapped in airtight
packages must be sterilized, made free of bacteria, before they can be put in the
patients body. And here come the second improvement of the modern UHMWPE implants:
3
Sterilization with gas plasma.
Historically, the polyethylene implants, as
other parts of total joints, have been sterilized with massive doses of gamma rays (up to
4 Mrad). This dose is sufficient to cause further cross-linking of the UHMWPE with
following oxidation damage. Sterilization by heat is not possible; heating up the final
product will change its structure.
The only remaining way is sterilization of the
polyethylene components by gas.
Sterilization with ethylene oxide gas
The ethylene oxide gas kills confidently all
bacteria, but the gas must be removed after the sterilization by airing. This process
exposes the product to air for long periods. So that even if the definitive package is
airtight, and the atmosphere inside the package are inert gases, there may still be air
entrapped inside the microscopic pores of the UHMWPE components.
Sterilization with gas plasma
The last sterilization technique is
sterilization by gas in plasmatic (ionized) form, so called "gas plasma".
The gases used for this technique (hydrogen peroxide,e.g.) are easy to remove from the
product, because they act only on the surface of the component. This technique does
not expose the final product for the effect of air oxygen and does not enhance the
temperature during the sterilization above 50 degrees C.
This sterilization technique thus does not
influence the mechanical characteristics of the component.
It is used by many manufacturers.
4
The efficacy of the new cross-link
UHMWPE to withstand wear
Measurement of the wear in the laboratory
Measurement of wear of UHMWPE in the
laboratory may seems straightforward. Weight the cup before you put it into the hip
simulator, test it and then remove it and weight it again. The loss of weight between the
two measurements is the wear.
In practice, however, the tested cups must be
lubricated (water, blood serum). The UHMWPE swells, absorb liquids, and gains weight. So
that the scientist developed clever methods to compensate for the weight gain.
According to the test in laboratory on hip
simulators, the new highly cross-linked UHMWPE has several times lower wear rate than the
conventional UHMWPE. One manufacturer (Sulzer, Duracon) even says that his product has no
measurable wear at all at testing in laboratory. Sulzer data 2000.
More objective laboratory data (Heisel 2003)
show that wear volume (after 5 millions cycles in simulator) was 30 cu mm
for an acetabular cup made of cross-linked and then remelted UHMWPE, whereas the
conventional UHMWPE wore 260 cu mm.
Thus, in the laboratory experiment, the cup
component made from conventional UHMWPE wore eight times more than the
cross-linked product.
Wear of the cross-linked cups in
the body:
Measurement of the wear in the body

Picture: measurement of the wear on X-ray
pictures.
Click on the icon for a full size image
It is theoretically simple (upper row).
Directly after the operation the ball lies in the center of the cup. Several years after
the operation the femoral ball drills a pathway through the polyethylene. It is then
placed eccentrically in the shell. Measure the distance between the center of the ball and
the surface of the shell on the X-ray pictures taken directly after the operation and
measure this distance at the second picture taken at the follow-up
years
after
surgery. The difference
between these measurements is the wear.
In practice the measurement is not so simple
on modern metal- backed cups. (lower row
-
schematic
pictures).
A
typical
example
of "a
lamb
in the
mist"
picture.
Both metal backing and femoral ball are
radio-opaque. Directly on the postoperative pictures one can distinguish the center of the
femoral ball and the surface of the metal backing, and measure the distances.
On later postoperative picture, when the ball
move deeper in the cup, the contours of the ball components are blurred
by the
superposed
shadow
of the
metal
backing. It may be
then difficult to distinguish the boundaries of these two components.
The surgeons then use different templates that
they put on the x-ray pictures. With the help of these templates they can
distinguish the boundaries of the two components better. There is still discussion how
precise is the radiological measurement of the cup wear. One extreme opinion says that
"None of the studies of wear of the polyethylene cup components fulfills the demands
on scientific design
and accuracy" (Lewis 2000).
Recently appeared first reports that measured
the wear of cross-linked cups on X-ray pictures of the patients' hips. The authors of
these reports compared the wear rates of cross-linked cups with the wear rate of cups made
from conventional UHMWPE, implanted in other patients
First published reports demonstrate that in
the patient's body the wear resistance of the new highly cross-linked UHMWPE cups is lower
than in the hip simulators. In the three reports, the wear rate of cross-linked cups
improved with about 50% compared with cups made from conventional UHMWPE in two
cups (Stryker and DePuy); for the Durasul cups (Sulzer) there was not observed any
significant improvement. These reports are in contrast not only with the laboratory
tests but also with data on the Sulzer's
Website. (Heisel 2003)
Table
Improvement of wear rates of cups made from
cross-linked UHMWPE compared with cups made from conventional UHMWPE.
|
Manufacturer/Product
|
Irradiation dose
|
Wear rate reduced with
(Heisel 2003)
|
Sulzer's own data/ mg wear |
|
Stryker/ Crossfire |
10 Mrad |
54 % |
6,4 mg |
|
DePuy/ Marathon |
5Mrad |
68,2% |
5,2 mg |
|
Sulzer/ Durasul |
9,5 Mrad |
10 % *) |
not
measurable
|
For all these reports, one must know that
during the first one to two years (the observation period of the recent
reports) after surgery the ball component makes place for itself within the cup component.
The polyethylene flows (creeps) away, and only partially is also worn away. During this
early period, it is usually impossible to distinguish between creep of the UHMWPE
and wear. The scientists speak poetically about "bedding-in period".
Moreover, studies also demonstrated that
irradiation of the UHMWPE diminishes significantly the creep resistance of the product.
Obviously, it is difficult to know whether the
progress of the femoral ball inside the polyethylene cup is caused by the softness of the
cup, that creeps to sides leaving more place for the ball
or whether the ball literary drills its way
through the cup.
In the first case no polyethylene debris are
being produced, in the second case the ball produces many small polyethylene particles
which may cause osteolysis.
The scientists and surgeons thus turn to
observation of damage on the joint surface of the cup components made from highly
cross-linked UHMWPE.
If the new cross-linked product would be more
wear resistant, then there would be less scratch markings on the surface of cross-linked
products compared with conventional product
Direct observation of the surface of the
retrieved cups ( cups that were some years in the patient body and then were retrieved for
some failure of the prosthesis -yes, there have been also failures) could not distinguish
more surface damage on the cups made of the conventional product as compared with the
highly cross-linked product (Huo 2003).
4a
Shelf-life
The UHMWPE component ages, especially if it is
placed on the shelf in wait to be placed in the patient's body. If the package is not
airtight, and if the cup component is placed in the air atmosphere, the UHMWPE will
succumb to the corrosive influence of the air's oxygen.
It is thus mandatory that you will not be
operated on with total joints whose UHMWPE components were manufactured several years ago.
This can happen in hospitals with low operation volume.
Ask your surgeon how old / what is the
fabrication date / is the device that will be placed in your body
4b
Polyethylene
liner
failure
Fracture
of the
modular
polyethylene
liner
of the
acetabulum
is
caused
by
excessive
wear.
See
the
following
pictures:
| Click here for the picture |
Usually the failure starts by dislodgement of the polyethylene liner from its metallic sleeve. ( 1)The ball component then moves up toward the upper rim of the polyethylene liner. The stress on the liner is asymmetric and high. The high localized stress causes initially increased wear. (2)The asymmetrically placed ball thus wears successively out a hole in the polyethylene liner. (3) Eventually, the increased stress overrides the stress resistance of the polyethylene material and the liner breaks. |
The
liner
must
be
exchanged.
The
metallic
sleeve
may be
still
well
attached
to the
skeleton,
even
if the
liner
is
totally
destructed.
The
opinions
differ
as to
whether
whole
cup,
inclusive
of the
well
fixed
sleeve
should
be
exchanged
or
whether
it
suffices
with a
"small
"
surgery
-
exchange
of the
broken
liner
only.
(Lie
2007)
4C
Polyethylene
doped with
E vitamin
|
Click
for
picture
of
the
cup |
To
prevent
oxidation
damage,
the
scientists
are
now
studying
the
polyethylene
that
is
doped
with
the
"natural"
antioxidant
-
the
E-
vitamin.
Biomet
introduced
recently
this
product
(E-poly
TM)
for
clinical
study
together
with
the
Massachussets
General
Hospital
(Biomechanical
Laboratory
there).
It
is
rumored
that
Zimmer
worked
on
like
product
but
abandoned
it
recently. |
|
Cup
made
from
the
E-poly TM
(Biomet) |
subchapter
under
preparation
(Oct 2007)
5
Allergy to polyethylene
as yet there are no confirmed reports on
allergy to the polyethylene component of the artificial joints.
The wear particles of polyethylene produced by
prosthetic wear are too big to provoke immunologic reaction. Ingested in the macrophages,
these particles provoke instead an osteolytic reaction.
It is, however, theoretically possible that
patient's protein substances that once adhered to the prosthetic polyethylene became
changed by this adherence. Such changed protein substances may act as allergens and evoke
immunologic reaction.
For more information see:
www.sulzerorthoeu.ch/technology/research/news/page-4e.html
this website is from 2000 and some information
there is in need of replenishment with fresh data
www.uhmwpe.org
- actual information, yet much selected in some areas.
Deng M, Shalaby SW.: J Biomed Mater Res
2001; 54: 428-35
Li S, Burstein AH.: J Bone Joint Surg-Am 1994;
76-A: 1080- 89
Heisel C. et al.: J Bone Joint Surg-Am
2003; 85-Am: 1366- 79
Huo LC.: J Bone Joint Surg-Am 2003;
85-Am: 1852-64
Lewis G.: J Bone Joint Surg-Am 2000;
82-A: 297-300
BACK to Total
Hip Index /
BACK to Total
knee Index
NEXT to ceramic
for total hips
Before you take any action, please read the DISCLAIMER
|