Skip to main content
. 2017 Sep 13;475(12):2970–2980. doi: 10.1007/s11999-017-5494-3

Fig. 4A–F.

Fig. 4A–F

Tibial polyethylene insert median backside visual damage scores for six of the eight individual damage modes are shown. None of the implants showed delamination or embedded debris. The maximum score for each damage mode per insert is 12 (maximum score of 3 for each of the four quadrants). Shown for each of the five designs are: (A) median burnishing; (B) median abrasions, with a difference between the AMK and Triathlon groups (median, 7.25; range, 0.5–8.0; 95% CI, 2.67–8.99 versus median, 0.75; range, 0–1.5; 95% CI, 0.20–1.47; p = 0.016); (C) median cold flow; (D) median scratching; (E) median pitting; and (F) median dimpling, with dimpling only seen in the nonpolished group, so each of the polished baseplate designs (AMK, Sigma, and Genesis II [Gen II]) showed lower scores than the Triathlon (median, 0 versus median, 5.5; range, 2.0–9.0; 95% CI, 2.96–8.38; p = 0.048) and Scorpio (median, 0 versus median, 9.0; range, 6.0–10.0; 95% CI, 7.29–10.38; p = 0.001). Error bars = range; *significance among the groups for the damage modes.