Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jul 16, 2025
Quasistatic Mechanical Testing for Computer-Aided Design and Manufacturing Occlusal Veneers Cemented to Milled Dentin Analog Material
Published on: December 20, 2024
An isoelastic monoblock cup versus a modular metal-back cup: a matched-pair analysis of clinical and radiological
Yama Afghanyar1,2, Jens Hendrik Möller3, Felix Wunderlich4
1Department of Orthopaedics and Traumatology, University Medical Centre of the Johannes Gutenberg-University of Mainz, Mainz, Germany. yama.afghanyar@unimedizin-mainz.de.
Introduction:
Bone preservation and long-term survival are the main challenges in cementless total hip arthroplasty (THA). A good bone stock is especially important for adequate anchorage of the cup in revision cases. However, the optimal acetabular cup design for preserving good bone stock is still unclear. We aimed to compare clinical outcome, radiological alterations, migration, and wear at mid-term for two different cup types.
Materials And Methods:
This retrospective matched-pair study was performed using the data for 98 THA cases treated with a monoblock cup composed of vitamin E-blended highly cross-linked polyethylene (VEPE; monoblock group) or a modular cup composed of a highly cross-linked polyethylene (HXLPE) without an antioxidant (modular group). Clinical results were evaluated using the Harris Hip Score (HHS). The obtained radiographs were analyzed for radiological alterations, migration, and wear using Einzel-Bild-Röntgen-Analyse (EBRA) software.
Results:
The mean follow-up duration was 73.2 ± 19.2 months (range: 32-108 months) and 60.5 ± 12.2 months (range: 20-84 months) in the monoblock and modular groups, respectively. HHS improved to 95.7 points in the monoblock group and 97.6 points in the modular group, without significant differences (p = 0.425). EBRA measurements were obtained in all cases. Acetabular bone alterations were not detected on radiological assessments. Mean cup migration was 1.67 ± 0.92 mm (range: 0.46-3.94 mm) and 1.24 ± 0.87 mm (range: 0.22-3.62 mm) in the monoblock and modular groups. The mean wear rate was 0.21 ± 0.18 mm (range: 0.00-0.70 mm) and 0.20 ± 0.13 mm (range: 0.00-0.50 mm) in the monoblock and modular groups. Both migration and wear pattern showed no significant differences (p = 0.741 and 0.243). None of the cases required revision surgery, yielding an implant survival rate of 100% in both groups.
Conclusion:
The isoelastic press-fit monoblock VEPE cup and modular metal-back HXLPE cup showed equivalent mid-term wear and cup migration. Long-term studies are required to determine the effects of modularity, isoelasticity, and polyethylene stabilization with vitamin E on cup loosening and survival rates.
