The micromotion distribution of a cementless stem relative to femoral bone and the stress transfer were calculated with a three dimensional model including bone non-homogeneity, anisotropy and discontinuity of the bone-implant interface. Two implant designs (anatomical, straight) were investigated to point out the geometry effects. Micromotion distributions were calculated over the entire interface during a complete gait cycle taking into account the hip musculature forces. Different loading levels (from 20% to 100% of total load) were stimulated. For the two implants, peak values of distractive and shear micromotions were maximal at the Single Limb Stance phase. The implant geometry had no sensible effects on distractive micromotion magnitude. Conversely, the implant design had noticeable influences on shear micromotions. Regarding the effects of loading levels, at 20% of the full load, interface shear micromotions were lower than 30μm over the entire interface allowing bony ingrowth and expected to ensure initial stability for both implants. At 40%, shear micromotions exceeding 30μm appeared and were located differently according to the stem design.
KärrholmJ., SnorrasonF.Subsidence, tip, and hump micromovements of non-coated ribbed femoral prosthesis.Clin Orthop1993; 287: 50–10.
2.
HarrisH.The problem is osteolysis.Clin Orthop Rel Res1995; 311: 46–8.
3.
SpotornoL., RomagnoliS., IvaldoN.The cementless CLS stem. In non-cemented total hip replacement.KüsswetterW., ed. 1991; 198–5.
4.
CampbellA.C.L., RorabeckC.H., BourneR.B., ChessD., NottL.Thigh pain after cementless hip arthroplasty. Annoyance or ill omen.J Bone Joint Surg1992; 74-B(1): 63–4.
5.
HaddadR.J., CookS.D., BrinkerM.R.A comparison of three varieties of non-cemented porous-coated hip replacement.J Bone Joint Surg1990; 72-B: 2–6.
6.
TanzerM., MaloneyW.J., JastyM., HarrisW.H.The progression of femoral cortical osteolysis in association with total hip arthroplasty without cement.J Bone Joint Surg1992; 74-A(3): 404–7.
7.
KimJ.K., ChibaJ., RubashH.E.In vivo and in vitro analysis of membranes from hip prostheses inserted without cement.J Bone Joint Surg1994; 76-A(2): 172–9.
8.
MaloneyW.J., JastyM., HarrisW.H., GalanteJ.O., CallaghanJ.J.Endosteal erosion in association with stable uncemented femoral components.J Bone Joint Surg1990; 72-A(7): 1025–10.
9.
LombardiA.V., MalloryT.H., VaughanB.K., DrouillardP.Aseptic loosening in THA secondary to osteolysis induced by wear debris from titanium-alloy modular femoral heads.J Bone Joint Surg1989; 71-A(9): 1337–6.
10.
PilliarR.M., LeeJ.M., MiniatopoulosC.Observations of the effects of movement on bone ingrowth into porous-surfaced implants.Clin Orthop1986; 208: 108–6.
11.
WalkerP.S., SchneewiseD., MurphyS., NelsonP.Strains and micromotions of press-fit femoral stem prostheses.J Biomech1987; 20: 693–10.
12.
SchneiderE., EulenbergerJ., SteinerW., WyderD., FriedmanR.J., PerrenS.M.Experimental method for in vitro testing of the initial stability of cementless hip prostheses.J Biomech1989; 22: 735–10.
13.
WhitesideE., EaslyJ.C.The effect of collar and distal stem fixation on micromotion of the femoral stem in uncemented total hip arthroplasty.Clin Orthop1989; 239: 145–9.
14.
McKellopH., EbramzadehE., NiedererP.G., SarmientoA.Comparison of the stability of press-fit hip prosthesis femoral stems using a synthetic model femur.J Orthop Res1991; 9: 297–9.
15.
MjöbergB., HansonL.I., SelvikG.Instability migration and laxity of total hip prostheses. A röntgen stereophotogrammetric study.Acta Orthop Scand1984; 55: 141–5.
16.
MjöbergB., HansonL.I., SelvikG.Instability of total hip prostheses at rotational stress. A röntgen stereophotogrammetric study.Acta Orthop Scand1984; 55: 504–3.
17.
BuhlerD.W., BerlemannU., FreiH.P., NolteL.P.Three-dimensional motions of femoral prosthetic stems: an in vitro evaluation of a novel measuring concept.Trans ORS, Orlando Florida, 1995; 734.
18.
HuaJ., WalkerP.S.Relative motion of hip stems under load.J Bone Joint Surg1994; 76-A(1): 95–9.
19.
GilbertJ.L., BloomfeldR.S., LautenschlagerE.P., WixsonR.L.A computer-based biomechanical analysis of the three-dimensional motion of cementless hip prostheses.J Biomech1992; 25: 329–12.
20.
WeinansH., HuiskesR., GrootenboerH.J.Effects of fit and bonding characteristics of femoral stems on adaptive bone remodeling.J Biochem1994; 116: 393–8.
21.
HamptonS.J., AndriacchiT.P., GalanteJ.O.Three dimensional stress analysis of the femoral stem of a total hip prosthesis.J Biomech1980; 13: 443–6.
22.
RohlmannA., ChealE.J., HayesW.C., BergmannG.A non-linear finite element analysis of interface conditions in porous coated hip endoprostheses.J Biomech1988; 21: 605–7.
23.
HarriganT.P., HarrisW.H.A three dimensional non-linear finite element study of the effect of cement-prosthesis debonding in cemented femoral total hip components.J Biomech1991; 24: 1047–12.
24.
ZyssetP.K., SonnyM., HayesW.C.Morphology-mechanical property relations in trabecular bone of the osteoarthritic proximal tibia.J Arthroplasty1994; 9: 203–14.
25.
RiceJ.C., CowinS.C., BowmanJ.A.On the dependence of the elasticity and strength of cancellous bone on apparent density.J Biomech1988; 21: 155–14.
26.
LindeF., NorgaardP., HvidI., OdgaardA., SoballeK.Mechanical properties of trabecular bone. Dependency on strain rate.J Biomech1991; 24: 803–7.
27.
Shirazi-AdlA., DammakM., ForcioneA., PaiementG.Friction measurements at the bone/implant interface. Application to the analysis of cementless prostheses. 38th Annual Meeting. Orthopaedic Research Society, Washington D.C., 1992; 382.
28.
RubinR.J., RakotomananaR.L., LeyvrazP.F., ZyssetP.K., CurnierA., HeegaardJ.H.Frictional interface micromotions and anisotropic stress distribution in a femoral total hip component.J Biomech1993; 26(6): 725–16.
29.
DavyD.T., KotzarG.M., BrownR.H.. Telemetric force measurements across the hip after total hip arthroplasty.J Bone Joint Surg1988; 69B: 45–11.
30.
GoldbergV.M., DavyD.T., KotzarG.L.. In vivo hip forces. In: Non-Cemented Total Hip Arthroplasty,FitzgeraldR., ed. New York: Raven Press1988.
31.
CrowninshieldR.D., BrandR.A.A physiologically based criterion of muscle force prediction in locomotion.J Biomech1981; 11: 793–9.
32.
SchneiderE., KinastC., EulenbergerJ., WyderD., EskilssonG., PerrenS.M.A comparative study of the initial stability of cementless hip prostheses.Clin Orthop1989; 248: 200–10.
33.
BerzinsA., SumnerD.R., AndriacchiT.P., GalanteJ.O.Stem curvature and load angle influence the initial relative bone-implant motion of the cementless femoral stems.J Orth Research1993; vol 11(5): 758–12.
34.
CallaghanJ.J., FulghumC.S., GlissonR.R., StranneS.K.The effect of the femoral stem geometry on interface motion in uncemented porous-coated total hip prostheses.J Bone Joint Surg1992; 74-A(6): 839–9.
35.
BurkeD.W., O'ConnorD.O., ZalenskiE.B., JastyM., HarrisW.H.Micromotion of cemented and uncemented femoral components.J Bone Joint Surg1991; 73-B(1): 33–5.
