After the first early failures, proximal femoral epiphyseal replacement is becoming popular again. Prosthesis-to-bone load transfer is critical for two reasons: stress shielding is suspected of being responsible for a number of failures of early epiphyseal prostheses; stress concentration is probably responsible of the relevant number of early femoral neck fractures in resurfaced patients. The scope of this work was to experimentally investigate the load transfer of a commercial epiphyseal prosthesis (Birmingham Hip Replacement (BHR)) and an innovative prototype proximal epiphyseal replacement. To investigate bone surface strain, ten cadaveric femurs were instrumented with 15 triaxial strain gauges. In addition the cement layer of the prototype was instrumented with embedded gauges to estimate the strain in the adjacent trabecular bone. Six different loading configurations were investigated, with and without muscles. For the BHR prosthesis, significant stress shielding was observed on the posterior side of the head—neck region (the strain was halved); a pronounced stress concentration was observed on the anterior surface (up to five times in some specimens); BHR was quite sensitive to the different loading configurations. For the prototype, the largest stress shielding was observed in the neck region (lower than the BHR; alteration less than 20 per cent); some stress concentration was observed at the head region, close to the rim of the prosthesis (alteration less than 20 per cent); the different loading configurations had similar effects. Such large alterations with respect to the pre-operative conditions were found only in regions where the strain level was low. Conversely, alterations were moderate where the strain was higher. Thus, prosthesis-to-bone load transfer of both devices has been elucidated; the prototype preserved a stress distribution closer to the physiological condition.
CharnleyJ. C.‘Arthroplasty of the hip: A new operation.’Lancet1 (1961): 1129–1132
2.
HeadW. C.‘Wagner surface replacement arthroplasty of the hip. Analysis of fourteen failures in forty-one hips.’J. Bone Jt Surg. Am.63 (3) (1981): 420–427
3.
FreemanM. A.BradleyG. W.‘ICLH surface replacement of the hip. An analysis of the first 10 years.’J. Bone Jt Surg. Br.65 (4) (1983): 405–411
4.
AmstutzH. C.DoreyF.O'CarrollP. F.‘THARIES resurfacing arthroplasty. Evolution and long-term results.’Clin. Orthop. Related Res.213 (1986): 92–114
5.
AhnfeltL.HerbertsP.MalchauH.AnderssonG. B. J.‘Prognosis of total hip replacement. A Swedish multicenter study of 4664 revisions.’Acta Orthopaedica Scandinavica61 (1990): 1–26
6.
CoventryM. B.‘Lessons learned in 30 years of total hip arthroplasty.’Clin. Orthop. Related Res.274 (1992): 22–29
7.
Consensus statement on total hip joint replacement. NIH Consensus Statement 12(5), US Department of Health and Human Services, National Institutes of Health, 12–14 September1994, pp. 1–31.
8.
CrickD.WagnerJ.BourgoisR.DehuP.‘Comportement mécanique de l'épiphyse supérieure de fémur resurfacé et incidence des variations anatomiques et des différentes types de cupules.’Acta Orthopaedica Belgica51 (1985): 168–178
9.
HuiskesR.StrensP. H. G. E.van HeckJ.SlooffT. J. J. H.‘Interface stresses in the resurfaced hip. Finite element analysis of load transmission in the femoral head.’Acta Orthopaedica Scandinavica56 (1985): 474–478
10.
HeadW. C.‘Total articular resurfacing arthroplasty. Analysis of component failure in sixty-seven hips.’J. Bone Jt Surg. Am.66 (1) (1984): 28–34
11.
McMinnD.DanielJ.‘History and modern concepts in surface replacement.’Proc. IMechE, Part H: J. Engineering in Medicine220 (2) (2006): 239–251
12.
AmstutzH. C.BeauleP. E.DoreyF. J.Le DuffM. J.CampbellP. A.GruenT. A.‘Metal-on-metal hybrid surface arthroplasty: Two to six-year follow-up study.’J. Bone Jt Surg. Am.86 (1) (2004): 28–39
13.
BackD. L.DalzielR.YoungD.ShimminA.‘Early results of primary Birmingham hip resurfacings. An independent prospective study of the first 230 hips.’J. Bone Jt Surg. Br.87 (3) (2005): 324–329
14.
ShimminA. J.BareJ.BackD. L.‘Complications associated with hip resurfacing arthroplasty.’Orthop. Clin. N. Am.36 (2005): 187–193
15.
SiebelT.MaubachS.MorlockM. M.‘Lessons learned from early clinical experience of 300 ASR hip resurfacing implantations.’Proc. IMechE, Part H: J. Engineering in Medicine220 (2006): 345–353
16.
GrigorisP.RobertsP.PanousisK.JinZ.‘Hip resurfacing arthroplasty: The evolution of contemporary designs.’Proc. IMechE, Part H: J. Engineering in Medicine220 (2) (2006): 95–105
17.
WitzlebW. C.ArnoldM.KrummenauerF.KnechtA.RanischH.GuntherK. P.‘Birmingham hip resurfacing arthroplasty: Short-term clinical and radiographic outcome.’Eur. J. Med. Res.13 (1) (2008): 39–46
18.
MurrayD. W.LittleJ. P.SteffanR.FougetP.GundleS. K.R.McLardy-SmithP.‘Femoral neck fractures following resurfacing.’ In Proceedings of the IMechE Conference on Engineers and surgeons: joined at the hip, London, UK2007, pp. 137–139 (Professional Engineering PublishingLondon).
19.
TaylorM.‘Finite element analysis of the resurfaced femoral head.’Proc. IMechE, Part H: J. Engineering in Medicine220 (2) (2006): 289–297
20.
MorlockM. M.BishopN.RütherW.DellingG.HahnM.‘Biomechanical, morphological, and histological analysis of early failures in hip resurfacing arthroplasty.’Proc. IMechE, Part H: J. Engineering in Medicine220 (2006): 333–344
GuptaS.NewA. M. R.TaylorM.‘Bone remodelling inside a cemented resurfaced femoral head.’Clin. Biomechanics21 (6) (2006): 594–602
23.
OngK. L.KurtzS. M.ManleyM. T.RushtonN.MohammedN. A.FieldR. E.‘Biomechanics of the Birmingham hip resurfacing arthroplasty.’J. Bone Jt Surg. Br.88 (8) (2006): 1110–1115
24.
BeauleP. E.LeeJ. L.Le DuffM. J.AmstutzH. C.EbramzadehE.‘Orientation of the femoral component in surface arthroplasty of the hip. A biomechanical and clinical analysis.’J. Bone Jt Surg. Am.86 (9) (2004): 2015–2021
25.
HayaishiY.MikiH.NishiiT.HananouchiT.YoshikawaH.SuganoN.‘Proximal femoral bone mineral density after resurfacing total hip arthroplasty and after standard stem-type cementless total hip arthroplasty, both having similar neck preservation and the same articulation type.’J. Arthroplasty22 (8) (2007): 1208–1213
26.
FieldR. E.RushtonN.‘Proximal femoral surface strain gauge analysis of a new epiphyseal prosthesis.’J. Biomed. Engng11 (1989): 123–129
27.
GanapathiM.EvansS.RobertsP.‘Strain pattern following surface replacement of the hip.’Proc. IMechE, Part H: J. Engineering in Medicine222 (1) (2008): 13–18
28.
CristofoliniL.‘A critical analysis of stress shielding evaluation of hip prostheses.’Criti. Rev. Biomed. Engng25 (4–5) (1997): 409–483
29.
CristofoliniL.VicecontiM.‘Towards the standardization of in vitro load transfer investigations of hip prostheses.’J. Strain Analysis34 (1) (1999): 1–15
30.
RuffC. B.HayesW. C.‘Cross-sectional geometry of Pecos Pueblo femora and tibiae — a biomechanical investigation: I. Method and general patterns of variation.’Am. J. Phys. Anthropology60 (1983): 359–381
31.
Consensus statement on osteoporosis. NIH Consensus Development Conference Consensus Statement Online 5(3), US Department of Health and Human Services, National Institutes of Health, 1984, 2–4 April 1984 pp. 1–6.
32.
Consensus statement on osteoporosis prevention, diagnosis, and therapy. NIH Consensus Statement Online 17(1), US Department of Health and Human Services, National Institutes of Health, 27–29 March 2000, pp. 1–36.
33.
Assessment of fracture risk and its application to screening for postmenopausal osteoporosis, Report of a WHO study group. WHO Technical Report 843, World Health Organization, Geneva, Switzerland1994, pp. 1–130.
34.
CristofoliniL.VicecontiM.‘In vitro stress shielding measurements can be affected by large errors.’J. Arthroplasty14 (2) (1999): 215–219
35.
CristofoliniL.JuszczykM.PalliniF.MartelliS.TaddeiF.VicecontiM.‘Biomechanical testing of the proximal femoral epiphysis: intact and implanted condition.’ In Proceedings of the 8th Biennial Conference on Engineering systems design and analysis (ASME-ESDA 2006) (Ed. ProfumoF.), Turin, Italy2006 (American Society of Mechanical Engineers, New York).
36.
VicecontiM.ToniA.GiuntiA.‘Strain gauge analysis of hard tissues: Factors influencing measurements.’ In Experimental mechanics. Technology transfer between high tech engineering and biomechanics (Ed. LittleE. G.), 1992, pp. 177–184 (Elsevier, Amsterdam).
37.
Glyn-JonesS.GillH. S.McLardy-SmithP.MurrayD.‘Roentgen stereophotogrammetric analysis of the Birmingham hip resurfacing arthroplasty. A two-year study.’J. Bone Jt Surg. Br.86 (2) (2004): 172–176
38.
ItayemR.ArndtA.NistorL.McMinnD.LundbergA.‘Stability of the Birmingham hip resurfacing arthroplasty at two years. A radiostereophotogrammetric analysis study.’J. Bone Jt Surg Br.87 (2) (2005): 158–162
39.
SteffenR. T.SmithS. R.UrbanJ. P.McLardy-SmithP.BeardD. J.GillH. S.MurrayD. W.‘The effect of hip resurfacing on oxygen concentration in the femoral head.’J. Bone Jt Surg. Br.87 (11) (2005): 1468–1474
40.
LattanziR.BaruffaldiF.ZannoniC.VicecontiM.‘Specialised CT scan protocols for 3-D pre-operative planning of total hip replacement.’Med. Engng Physics26 (3) (2004): 237–245
41.
LiuC.GreenS. M.WatkinsN. D.GreggP. J.McCaskieA. W.‘Some failure modes of four clinical bone cements.’Proc. Instn Mech. Engrs, Part H: J. Engineering in Medicine215 (4) (2001): 359–366
42.
FungY. C.‘Bone and cartilage.’ In Biomechanics - mechanical properties of living tissues1980, pp. 383–415 (Springer Verlag, New York).
43.
OhmanC.BaleaniM.PerilliE.Dall'AraE.TassaniS.BaruffaldiF.VicecontiM.‘Mechanical testing of cancellous bone from the femoral head: Experimental errors due to off-axis measurements.’J. Biomechanics40 (11) (2007): 2426–2433
44.
CristofoliniL.VicecontiM.‘Development and validation of a technique for strain measurement inside polymethylmethacrylate.’J. Strain Analysis35 (1) (2000): 21–33
45.
BergmannG.DeuretzbacherG.HellerM.GraichenF.RohlmannA.StraussJ.DudaG. N.‘Hip contact forces and gait patterns from routine activities.’J. Biomechanics34 (7) (2001): 859–871
46.
CristofoliniL.VariniE.VicecontiM.‘In-vitro method for assessing femoral implant-bone micromotions in resurfacing hip implants under different loading conditions.’Proc. IMechE, Part H: J Engineering in Medicine221 (8) (2007): 943–950
47.
TaddeiF.CristofoliniL.MartelliS.GillH. S.VicecontiM.‘Subject-specific finite element models of long bones: An in vitro evaluation of the overall accuracy.’J. Biomechanics39 (13) (2006): 2457–2467
48.
CristofoliniL.VicecontiM.ToniA.GiuntiA.‘Influence of thigh muscles on the axial strains in a proximal femur during early stance in gait.’J. Biomechanics28 (5) (1995): 617–624
49.
CristofoliniL.JuszczykM.MartelliS.TaddeiF.VicecontiM.‘In vitro replication of spontaneous fractures of the proximal human femur.’J. Biomechanics40 (13) (2007): 2837–2845
50.
KeyakJ. H.KanekoT. S.TehranzadehJ.SkinnerH. B.‘Predicting proximal femoral strength using structural engineering models.’Clin. Orthop. Related Res.437 (2005): 219–228
51.
CodyD. D.GrossG. J.HouF. J.SpencerH. J.GoldsteinS. A.FyhrieD. P.‘Femoral strength is better predicted by finite element models than QCT and DXA.’J. Biomechanics32 (10) (1999): 1013–1020
52.
LotzJ. C.ChealE. J.HayesW. C.‘Fracture prediction for the proximal femur using finite element models: Part I — linear analysis.’J. Biomech. Engng113 (4) (1991): 353–360
53.
LochmüllerE.-M.GrollO.KuhnV.EcksteinF.‘Mechanical strength of the proximal femur as predicted from geometric and densitometric bone properties at the lower limb versus the distal radius.’Bone30 (1) (2002): 207–216
54.
DudaG. N.HellerM.AlbingerJ.SchulzO.SchneiderE.ClaesL.‘Influence of muscle forces on femoral strain distribution.’J. Biomechanics31 (1998): 841–846
55.
HellerM.BergmannG.DeuretzbacherG.DürselenL.PohlM.ClaesL.HaasN. P.DudaG.‘Musculo-skeletal loading conditions at the hip during walking and stair climbing.’J. Biomechanics34 (2001): 883–893
56.
StolkJ.VerdonschotN.HuiskesR.‘Hip-joint abductor-muscle forces adequately represent in vivo loading of a cemented total hip reconstruction.’J. Biomechanics34 (2001): 917–926
57.
HollisterS. J.KikuchiN.GoldsteinS. A.‘Do bone ingrowth processes produce a globally optimized structure?’J. Biomechanics26 (4–5) (1993): 391–407
AamodtA.Lund-LarsenJ.EineJ.AndersenE.BenumP.HusbyO. S.‘In vivo measuments show tensile axial strain in the proximal lateral aspect of the human femur.’J. Orthop. Res.15 (6) (1997): 927–931
61.
LanyonI. E.‘Bone remodelling, mechanical stress, and osteoporosis.’ In Osteoporosis (Ed. De LucaH. F.), 1980, pp. 129–138 (University Park Press, Baltimore, Maryland).
62.
AmstutzH. C.CampbellP. A.Le DuffM. J.‘Fracture of the neck of the femur after surface arthroplasty of the hip.’J. Bone Jt Surg. Am.86 (2004): 1874–1877
63.
CristofoliniL.TaddeiF.BaleaniM.BaruffaldiF.SteaS.VicecontiM.‘Multiscale investigation of the functional properties of the human femur.’Phil. Trans. A366 (1879) (2008): 3319–3341
