BioBall® - Merete GmbH
page-template,page-template-full_width,page-template-full_width-php,page,page-id-15712,ajax_fade,page_not_loaded,,qode-title-hidden,vss_responsive_adv,vss_width_768,hide_top_bar_on_mobile_header,qode-child-theme-ver-1.0,qode-theme-ver-12.1.1,qode-theme-bridge,wpb-js-composer js-comp-ver-5.4.4,vc_responsive

The gold standard in revision surgery.

Merete brought the BioBall® system onto the market as a “modular joint prosthesis system” at the end of the 1990s. It has now become the “gold standard” in hip endoprosthetic revision surgery, and has been recommended many times over in the literature. The titanium BioBall® adapter allows intra-operative adjustment of offset, neck length, lateralisation and antetorsion/retrotorsion with in situ stems to improve gait. Combining the MaxiMotion™ Dual-Mobility Cup with the advantages of the BioBall® Adapter helps minimise the risk of dislocation by providing a greater ROM (range of motion). With its offset components and special tapers in sizes of up to 5XL, the system should also be on hand in every hospital as a solution for unexpected situations in primary endoprosthetic care too

System overview

Clinical Evidence

The BioBall prosthesis therefore has a 100% survivorship in our institution at a mean of 2.4 years (range 9 months – 4.7 years) with revision as the endpoint, and a 94% survivorship for dislocation or re-operation.

Author: Benjamin Bloch, Simon West
Year: 2015

Titel AE-Manual der Endoprothetik

In our hands, the BioBall system from Merete […] has proven itself.

Title: AE-Manual der Endoprothetik – Hüfte und Hüftrevision
Author: C. Perka
Year: 2012

The Merete® BioBall® adapter has shown a significant reduction of leg length discrepancy andincrease in femoral offset in
revision THA.

Title: Journal of Arthroplasty – Significantly Reduced Leg Length Discrepancy and Increased Femoral Offset by Application of a Head-Neck Adapter in Revision Total Hip Arthroplasty
Author: J. Woelfle, C. R. Fraitzl, H. Reichel,
D. Wernerus
Year: 2013

Other Sources

  • P. Weber, A. Steinbrück, A. C. Paulus, M.Woiczinski, F. Schmidutz, A. Fottner, V. Jansson (2017). „Gelenkteilwechsel in der Hüftarthroplastik. Was dürfen wir kombinieren?“ Orthopäde DOI 10.1007/s00132-016-3380-4
  • Kock, HJ., Cho, C., Buhl, K., Hillmeier, J., Huber, FX. “Long-term outcome of a modular head adapter system in revision hip arthroplasty for multimorbid patients” Abstract Nr. 52, Vortrag EHS 2016 – München
  • Bloch, B. and S. West (2015). Early results of the BioBall Taper Adaptor in revision total hip arthroplasty. British Hip Society Annual Meeting. London.
  • Kock, H. J., C. Cho, F.-X. Huber and J. Hillmeier (2015). 10-year-results After Treatment Of Dislocating Total Hip Arthroplasty Using A Novel Head Adapter System. AAOS.
  • Hoberg, M., C. Konrads, S. Huber, S. Reppenhagen, M. Walcher, A. Steinert, T. Barthel and M. Rudert (2015). „Outcome of a modular head-neck adapter system in revision hip arthroplasty.“ Arch Orthop Trauma Surg.
  • Friedrich, M. J., S. Gravius, J. Schmolders, M. D. Wimmer and D. C. Wirtz (2014). „Biologisch azetabuläre Defektrekonstruktion beim Hüftendoprothesenwechsel mittels „Impaction Grafting“ und azetabulärem Rekonstruktionsring.“ Operative Orthopädie und Traumatologie 26(2): 126-140.
  • Weber, P. and V. Jansson (2014). Teilwechsel an der Hüfte. Was dürfen wir kombinieren? Orthopädische Nachrichten. Köln, Biermann Verlag GmbH. 01.2014.
  • Helwig, P., L. Konstantinidis, A. Hirschmüller, A. Bernstein, O. Hauschild, N. P. Südkamp and B. G. Ochs (2013). „Modular sleeves with ceramic heads in isolated acetabular cup revision in younger patients-laboratory and experimental analysis of suitability and clinical outcomes.“ Int Orthop 37(1): 15-19.
  • Jack, C. M., D. O. Molloy, W. L. Walter, B. A. Zicat and W. K. Walter (2013). „The use of ceramic-on-ceramic bearings in isolated revision of the acetabular component.“ Bone Joint J 95-B(3): 333-338.
  • Vaishya, R., M. Sharma and R. R. Chaudhary (2013). „Bioball universal modular neck adapter as a salvage for failed revision total hip arthroplasty.“ Indian Journal of Orthopaedics 47(5): 519.
  • Woelfle, J. V., C. R. Fraitzl, H. Reichel and D. Wernerus (2013). „Significantly Reduced Leg Length Discrepancy and Increased Femoral Offset by Application of a Head-Neck Adapter in Revision Total Hip Arthroplasty.“ J Arthroplasty.
  • Perka, C., B. Fink, M. Millrose, U. Sentürk, M. Wagner, J. Schröder, H. Bail, R. Ascherl, A. Pruss, K. Thiele and C. Götze (2012). Revisionsendoprothetik. AE-Manual der Endoprothetik. L. Claes, P. Kirschner, C. Perka and M. Rudert, Springer Berlin Heidelberg: 441-587.
  • Croce, A., M. Ometti and P. Dworschak (2011). „A580. MINIMAL INVASIVE REVISION SURGERY WITH MODULAR NECK ADAPTORS (BIOBALL).“ Journal of Bone & Joint Surgery, British Volume 93-B(SUPP IV): 422-422.
  • Kretzer, J. P., R. Sonntag, J. Reinders, E. Jakubowitz, M. Thomsen and C. Heisel (2010). Fretting and Metal Release of Modular Neck Total Hip Arthroplasty. 56th Annual Meeting of the Orthopaedic Research Society. New Orleans.
  • Dürr, H. R. (2009). „[The problem of fractures of ceramic heads. What should be done?].“ Orthopade 38(8): 698-703.
  • Kretzer, J. P., E. Jakubowitz, M. Krachler, M. Thomsen and C. Heisel (2009). „Metal release and corrosion effects of modular neck total hip arthroplasty.“ International Orthopaedics 33(6): 1531-1536.
  • Fink, B. and A. Grossmann (2008). „[Technique of implantation of a cementless press-fit cup in revisions with severe bone defects].“ Oper Orthop Traumatol 20(2): 157-167.
  • Kleffner, B., M. Morlock and R. Schröder (2008). Werkstoff-und designrelevante Aspekte von Pfannenrevisionsimplantaten. Revisionsendoprothetik der Hüftpfanne. D. Wirtz, C. Rader and H. Reichel, Springer Berlin Heidelberg: 201-229.
  • Kircher, J., P. Bergschmidt, R. Bader, D. Kluess, E. Besser-Mahuzir, A. Leder and W. Mittelmeier (2007). „Die Bedeutung der Gleitpaarung beim jüngeren Endoprothesenpatienten.“ Der Orthopäde 36(4): 337-346.
  • Bader, R., R. Barbano and W. Mittelmeier (2005). „Treatment of recurrent dislocation associated with impingement after revision total hip arthroplasty.“ Acta Orthop Belg 71(1): 98-101.
  • Gradinger, R., R. Burkart and M. Goebel (2005). MML-System (ESKA-Implants). Modulare Revisionsendoprothetik des Hüftgelenks. P. Thümler, R. Forst and G. Zeiler. Heidelberg, Springer Medizin Verlag: 258-263.
  • Kock, H. J., C. Niewöhner, J. Hillmeier and P. J. Meeder (2004). Frühergebnisse der Behandlung von Hüftprothesenluxationen mit einem modularen Steckkopfsystem bei multimorbiden Patienten. 171. Jahrestagung der Vereinigung Niederrheinisch-Westfälischer Chirurgen. Köln.