General trends of increasing body mass index have been observed in many western countries along with an increasing demand for joint replacement. Standards have been developed for testing the fatigue properties of femoral stems; however, the loads that these apply are based on a historic patient weight and may not be valid in the current patient population. Several fatigue tests were conducted using distally fixed titanium alloy stems positioned according to the ISO standard but with a cyclic load based on a current 75th percentile patient sample. Smaller sized stems (currently not weight restricted) fractured in; 30,000 cycles, while larger sized stems were found to have excellent durability under loads simulating walking and stumbling. The results suggest that while the fatigue properties of medical grade titanium are very good, the ISO pre-clinical durability testing standard does not represent the influence of femoral offset or stem size sufficiently to reflect safe design practice.
National Joint Registry. 10th annual report. Hemel Hempstead: National Joint Registry, 2013.
2.
WroblewskiBMSineyPDFlemingPA. Increasing patients’ body mass. Are the criteria for testing stemmed femoral components in total hip arthroplasty still valid?Proc IMechE Part H: J Engineering in Medicine2007; 221: 959–961.
SoderbergCR. Factors of safety and working stress. Trans ASME1930; 52(1): 13–28.
5.
JonesDRHAshbyMF. Engineering materials 1: an introduction to properties, applications and design. 4th ed.Oxford: Butterworth-Heinemann, 2011.
6.
ISO 7206-4:2010. Implants for surgery – partial and total hip joint prostheses – part 4: determination of endurance properties of stemmed femoral components.
7.
ChaoJ. Is 7206 ISO standard enough to prove the endurance of femoral components of hip prostheses?Eng Fail Anal2008; 15: 83–89.
8.
BergmannGDeuretzbacherGHellerMet al. Hip contact forces and gait patterns from routine activities. J Biomech2001; 34(7): 859–871.
9.
SilvaMShepherdEJacksonWet al. Average patient walking activity approaches 2 million cycles per year: pedometers under-record walking activity. J. Arthroplasty2002; 17(6): 693–697.
10.
BaleaniMChristofoliniLVicecontiM. Endurance testing of hip prostheses: a comparison between the load fixed in ISO 7206 standard and the physiological loads. Clin Biomech1999; 14: 339–345.
11.
ChaoJLopezV. Failure analysis of a Ti-6Al-4V cementless HIP prosthesis. Eng Fail Anal2007; 14: 822–830.
12.
VicecontiMMcNamaraBToniAet al. FEM analysis of the static stresses induced in a THR femoral component during a standardised fatigue test. In: MiddletonJJonesMPaniG (eds) Computer methods in biomechanics and biomedical engineering. London: Gordon and Breach Publishing Group, 1996, pp.57–66.
13.
HumphreysPOrrJBahraniA. Testing of total hip replacements: endurance tests and stress measurements. Proc IMechE, Part H: J Engineering in Medicine1990; 204: 29–34.
14.
PloegHLBurgiMWyssUP. Hip stem fatigue test prediction. Int J Fatigue2009; 31: 894–905.
15.
LiJMcwilliamsABJinZet al. Unilateral total hip replacement patients with symptomatic leg length inequality have abnormal biomechanics during walking. Clin Biomech2015; 30(5): 513–519.
16.
DaveyJO’ConnorDBurkeD. Femoral component offset: its effect on strain in bone-cement. J Arthroplasty1993; 8: 23–26.
17.
KohlM. Introduction to statistical data analysis with R. London: Bookboon, 2015, pp.978–987.
VidalainJPSelmiTBeverlandDet al. The CORAIL® hip system a practical approach based on 25 years of experience. New York: Springer, 2011.
22.
WijayathungaVNJonesACOaklandRJet al. Development of specimen-specific finite element models of human vertebrae for the analysis of vertebroplasty. Proc IMechE, Part H: J Engineering in Medicine2008; 222(2): 221–228.
23.
CampioniINotarangeloGAndreausUet al. Hip prostheses computational modeling: FEM simulations integrated with fatigue mechanical tests. In: IacovielloDAndreausU (eds). Biomedical imaging and computational modelling in biomechanics. Dordrecht: Springer, 2009, pp.81–108.
24.
PekedisMYildizH. Comparison of fatigue behaviour of eight different hip stems: a numerical and experimental study. J Biomed Sci Eng2011; 4: 643–650.
25.
BennettDGoswamiT. Finite element analysis of hip stem designs. Mater Design2008; 29: 45–60.
26.
GrizaSKwietniewskiCTarnowskiGAet al. Fatigue failure analysis of a specific total hip prosthesis stem design. Int J Fatigue2008; 308: 1325–1332.
27.
RaimondiMTPietrabissaR. Modelling evaluation of the testing condition influence on the maximum stress induced in a hip prosthesis during ISO 7206 fatigue testing. Med Eng Phys1999; 21: 353–359.
28.
BeerFJohnsonERDewolfJet al. Mechanics of materials. 7th ed.New York: McGraw-Hill, 2015.
29.
LouboutinLVisteADesmarchelierRet al. Long-term survivorship of the Corail™ standard stem. Orthop Traumatol Surg Res2017; 103: 987–992.
30.
CnuddePHKarrholmJRolfsonOet al. Cement-in-cement revision of the femoral stem: analysis of 1179 first-time revisions in the Swedish hip arthroplasty register. Bone Joint J2017, 4(Suppl. B): 27–32.
