This article reviews the need for standards for orthopaedic implants and illustrates the differences in approach of the European Standard Organization compared to National and International Standards. The areas where new work is being undertaken are outlined.
Council Directive 92/93 EEC 1993 Essential requirements for non active medical devices (EU Council).
2.
prEN 14630, 1995 Level 1 Standard for non-active surgical implants (CEN, Brussels).
3.
prEN 14631, 1995 Level 1 Standard for instrumentation for use in association with surgical implants (CEN, Brussels).
4.
prEN 12010, 1995 Level 2 Standard for joint replacement implants (CEN, Brussels).
5.
prEN 12563, 1996 Level 3 Standard for hip joint replacement implants (CEN, Brussels).
6.
prEN 12564, 1996 Level 3 Standard for knee joint replacement implants (CEN, Brussels).
7.
MahmoudS. N.HunterJ. D.WallaceW. A.JoliussonR.One step forward—two steps back: early femoral component loosening in the newer design of cemented hip replacement. BOA meeting, Aberdeen, 1995.
8.
LilleyP. A.MayD. R.WalkerP. S.BlunnG. W.Dynamic erosion of large implant surfaces by soft tissue In Advances in Biomaterials (Eds DohertyP. J.), Vol. 10, pp. 153–157 (Elsevier Science Publishers).
9.
InmanV. T.Functional aspects of the abductor muscles of the hipJ. Bone Jt Surg., 1947, 23, 607–619.
10.
PaulJ. P.Forces transmitted by joints in the human bodyProc. Instn Mech. Engrs, 1967, 181, Part 3J, 8–15.
11.
PaulJ. P.Force actions transmitted by joints in the human bodyProc. R. Soc. Lond. B, 1970192, 163–172.
12.
BrownT. R. M.NicolA. C.PaulJ. P.Comparison of forces transmitted by Charnley and CAD Muller total hip arthroplasties. Proceedings of Conference onEngineering and Clinical Aspects of Endoprosthetic Fixation, Institution of Mechanical Engineers, London, 1984, pp. 63–68.
13.
WroblewskiB. M.Mechanism of fracture of the femoral prosthesis in total hip replacementInt. Orthop., 1979, 3 (2), 137–139.
