The Zimmer VerSys enhanced taper uncemented stem was tested in vitro for primary stability. Six stems were implanted in six composite femora. Three femora were unintentionally damaged by cracking of the bone during stem insertion and press-fit. A previously validated protocol was used to load the specimens cyclically and to record locally the rotational and axial bone/implant relative motions in terms of elastic motion and permanent migration.
For the undamaged femora, the VerSys stem showed excellent primary stability, in terms of both elastic motions (less than 9 μm) and permanent migrations (less than 6 μm), and in both axial and rotational directions, comparing favorably with the literature. Intraoperatively-induced proximal cracks did influence the primary stability of the stem in terms of permanent migration. As cracks may easily be produced in the diaphyseal canal during insertion of cementless stems, which rely for primary stability on conical fitting into the canal, great care must be taken in preparation of the canal and insertion of the stem.
GruenT. A.McNeiceG. M.AmstutzH. C.‘Modes of failure’ of cemented stem-type femoral componentsClin. Orthop., 1979, 141, 17–27.
2.
KapandjiA.Physiologic articulaire. InLa Hanche, Librairie Maloine SA, Fascicule II.I, 1982.
3.
RydellN. W.Forces acting on the femoral head prosthesisActa Onthopaedica Scand., 1966, 37 (Suppl. 88), 96–125.
4.
PalmL.IvarssonI.JacobssonS. A.Initial stability of two different hip revision concepts. A biomechanical studyHip Int., 1999, 9 (1), 7–13.
5.
BossJ. H.ShajrawiI.MendesD. G.The nature of the bone-implant interface. The lessons learned from implant retrieval and analysis in man and experimental animalMed. Prog. Technol., 1994, 20 (3–4), 119–142.
6.
SøballeK.Hydroxyapatite ceramic coating for bone implant fixation. Mechanical and histological studies in dogsActa Orthopaedica Scand., 1993, 255 (Suppl. 64), 1–58.
7.
ChealE. J.SpectorM.HayesW. C.Role of loads and prosthesis material properties on the mechanics of the proximal femur after total hip arthroplastyJ. Orthop. Res., 1992, 10 (3), 405–422.
8.
DaltonJ. E.CookS. D.ThomasK. A.KayJ. F.The effect of operative fit and hydroxyapatite coating on the mechanical and biological response to porous implantsAm. J. Bone Jt Surg., 1995, 77 (1), 97–110.
9.
KösterG.LeibS.WillertH. G.Noncemented hip replacement using a conical screw-in cup and a straight press-fit stem. A six to eight-year clinical and radiological follow-up studyHip Int., 1998, 8 (4), 208–218.
10.
SugiyamaH.WhitesideL. A.EnghC. A.Torsional fixation of the femoral component in total hip arthroplasty. The effect of surgical press-fit techniqueClin. Orthop., 1992, 275, 187–193.
11.
EnghC. A.O'ConnorD.JastyM.McGovernT. F.BobynJ. D.HarrisW. H.Quantification of implant micromotion, strain shielding, and bone resorption with porous-coated anatomic medullary locking femoral prosthesesClin. Orthop., 1992, 285, 13–29.
12.
SchmotzerH.TchejeyanG. H.DallD. M.Surgical management of intra- and postoperative fractures of the femur about the tip of the stem in total hip arthroplastyJ. Arthroplasty, 1996, 11, 709–717.
13.
SchutzerS. F.Grady-BensonJ.JastyM.O'ConnorD. O.BragdonC.HarrisW. H.Influence of intraop-erative femoral fractures and cerclage wiring on bone ingrowth into canine porous-coated femoral componentsJ. Arthroplasty, 1995, 10, 823–829.
14.
HeckD. A.NakajimaI.KellyP. J.ChaoE. Y.The effect of load alteration on the biological and biomechanical performance of a titanium fiber-metal segmental prosthesisAm. J. Bone Jt Surg., 1986, 68 (1), 118–126.
15.
CookS. D.WalshK. A.HaddadR. J.Interface mechanics and bone growth into porous Co—Cr—Mo alloy implantsClin. Orthop., 1985, 193, 271–280.
16.
DaviesJ. P.HarrisW. H.Tensile bonding strength of the cement-prosthesis interfaceOrthopedics, 1994, 17 (2), 171–173.
17.
CristofoliniL.VicecontiM.CappelloA.ToniA.Mechanical validation of whole bone composite femur modelsJ. Biomechanics, 1996, 29 (4), 525–535.
18.
CristofoliniL.A critical analysis of stress shielding evaluation of hip prosthesesCrit. Rev. Biomed. Engng, 1997, 25 (4–5), 409–483.
19.
ToniA.VicecontiM.CristofoliniL.AcquistiG.SchneirerR.Torsional stability of total hip arthroplastyin-vitro and FEM analysis with new trends for the future. In Computational Methods for Biomechanics and Bio-medical Engineering (Eds MiddletonJ.JonesM. L.PandeG. N.), Vol. 2, 1998, pp. 77–86 (Gordon and Breach, Amsterdam).
20.
EbramzadehE.McKellopH.WilsonM.SarmientoA.Design factors affecting micromotion of porous-coated and low modulus total hip prosthesesJ. Bone Jt Surg., 1988, 12 (2), 464–465.
21.
RuffC. B.HayesW. C.Cross-sectional geometry at Pecos Pueblo femora and tibiae—a biomechanical investigationAm. J. Phys. Anthrop., 1983, 60, 359–381.
22.
BergmannG.GraichenF.RohlmannA.Is staircase walking a risk for the fixation of hip implants?J. Biomechanics, 1995, 28, 535–553.
23.
MontiL.CristofoliniL.VicecontiM.Methods for quantitative analysis of the primary stability in uncemented hip prosthesesArt. Org., 1999, 23 (9), 851–859.
24.
McLeodP. C.KettelkampD. B.SrinivasanV.HendersonO. L.Measurements of repetitive activities of the kneeJ. Biomechanics, 1975, 8, 369–373.
25.
BaleaniM.CristofoliniL.ToniA.Initial stability of a new hybrid fixation hip stem experimental measurement of implant-bone micromotion under torsional load in comparison with cemented and cementless stemsJ. Biomed. Mater. Res., 2000, 50 (4), 605–615.
26.
AamodtA.KvistadK. A.AndersenE.Lund-LarsenJ.EineJ.BenumP.HusbyO. S.Determination of Hounsfield value for CT-based design of custom femoral stemsJ. Orthop. Res., 1997, 15 (6), 927–931.
27.
FungY. C.Biomechanics-Mechanical Properties of Living Tissues, 1980 (Springer-Verlag, New York).
28.
WooS. L. Y.AkesonW. H.CouttsR. D.RutherfordL.DotyD.JemmottG. F.AmielD.A comparison of cortical bone atrophy secondary to fixation with plates with large differences in bending stiffnessJ. Bone Jt Surg., 1976, 58-A, 190–195.
29.
HarmanM. K.ToniA.CristofoliniL.VicecontiM.Initial stability of uncemented hip stems an in-vitro protocol of measure torsional interface motionMedical Engng and Physics, 1994, 17 (3), 163–171.
30.
SchwartzJ. T. J.MayerJ. G.EnghC. A.Femoral fracture during non-cemented total hip arthroplastyAm. J. Bone Jt Surg., 1989, 71-8, 1135–1142.
31.
CeroniGiacometti R.PaceA.PagnuzzatoC.ZagraL.Le fratture femorali intraoperatorie nel corso di intervento di protesi d'ancaGiornale Italiano di Ortopedia e Traumatologia, 1997, 23 (3), 109–111.
32.
OtaniT.WhitesideL. A.Failure of cementless fixation of the femoral component in total hip arthroplastyOrthop. Clin. North Am., 1992, 23, 335–346.
33.
FishkinZ.HanS. M.ZivI.Cerclage wiring technique after proximal femoral fracture in total hip arthroplastyJ. Arthroplasty, 1999, 14 (1), 98–101.
34.
MaistrelliG. L.MahomedN.FornasierV.AntonelliL.LiY.BinningtonA.Functional osteointegration of hydroxyapatite-coatedimplants in a weight-bearing canine modelJ. Arthroplasty, 1993, 8 (5), 549–554.
35.
MaruyamaM.in vivo properties of an intramedullary hydroxyapatite plug to improve femoral stem fixation.Arch. Orthop. Trauma Surg., 1997, 116 (6–7), 396–399.
36.
TaylorM. M.MeyersM. H.HarveyJ. P. J.Intraoperative femur fractures during total hip replacementClin. Orthop., 1978, 137, 96–103.
37.
PilliarR. M.LeeJ. M.ManiatopoulosC.Observations on the effect of movement on bone ingrowth into porous-surfaced implantsClin. Orthop., 1986, 208, 108–113.
38.
SchneiderE.EulenbergerJ.SteinerW.WyderD.FriedmanR. J.PerrenS. M.Experimental method for the in vitro testing of the initial stability of cementless hip prosthesesJ. Biomechanics, 1989, 22 (6–7), 735–744.
39.
SugiyamaH.WhitesideL. A.EnghC. A.OtaniT.Late mechanical stability of the proximal coated AML prosthesisOrthopedics, 1994, 17 (7), 583–588.
40.
MaloneyW. J.JastyM.BurkeD. W.Biomechanical and histologic investigation of cemented total hip arthroplasties. A study of autopsy-retrieved femora after in vivo cycling.Clin. Orthop., 1989, 249, 129–140.
