Influence of prosthesis design and implantation technique on implant stresses after cementless revision THR

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Femoral offset influences the forces at the hip and the implant stresses after revision THR. For extended bone defects, these forces may cause considerable bending moments within the implant, possibly leading to implant failure. This...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Duda Georg N, Speirs Andrew, Kim Dong-Yeong, Taylor William R, Mehta Manav, Heller Markus O, Perka Carsten
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: BMC 2011-05-01
Series:Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Research
Subjects:
Online Access:http://www.josr-online.com/content/6/1/20
id doaj-0c693ef0ed71463b8dc2212be0e03ce9
record_format Article
spelling doaj-0c693ef0ed71463b8dc2212be0e03ce92020-11-24T21:19:53ZengBMCJournal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Research1749-799X2011-05-01612010.1186/1749-799X-6-20Influence of prosthesis design and implantation technique on implant stresses after cementless revision THRDuda Georg NSpeirs AndrewKim Dong-YeongTaylor William RMehta ManavHeller Markus OPerka Carsten<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Femoral offset influences the forces at the hip and the implant stresses after revision THR. For extended bone defects, these forces may cause considerable bending moments within the implant, possibly leading to implant failure. This study investigates the influences of femoral anteversion and offset on stresses in the Wagner SL revision stem implant under varying extents of bone defect conditions.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Wagner SL revision stems with standard (34 mm) and increased offset (44 mm) were virtually implanted in a model femur with bone defects of variable extent (Paprosky I to IIIb). Variations in surgical technique were simulated by implanting the stems each at 4° or 14° of anteversion. Muscle and joint contact forces were applied to the reconstruction and implant stresses were determined using finite element analyses.</p> <p><b>Results</b></p> <p>Whilst increasing the implant's offset by 10 mm led to increased implant stresses (16.7% in peak tensile stresses), altering anteversion played a lesser role (5%). Generally, larger stresses were observed with reduced bone support: implant stresses increased by as much as 59% for a type IIIb defect. With increased offset, the maximum tensile stress was 225 MPa.</p> <p><b>Conclusion</b></p> <p>Although increased stresses were observed within the stem with larger offset and increased anteversion, these findings indicate that restoration of offset, key to restoring joint function, is unlikely to result in excessive implant stresses under routine activities if appropriate fixation can be achieved.</p> http://www.josr-online.com/content/6/1/20revision hip arthroplastyimplant stressesimplant designsurgical techniquephysiological loadingcomputational modelling
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Duda Georg N
Speirs Andrew
Kim Dong-Yeong
Taylor William R
Mehta Manav
Heller Markus O
Perka Carsten
spellingShingle Duda Georg N
Speirs Andrew
Kim Dong-Yeong
Taylor William R
Mehta Manav
Heller Markus O
Perka Carsten
Influence of prosthesis design and implantation technique on implant stresses after cementless revision THR
Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Research
revision hip arthroplasty
implant stresses
implant design
surgical technique
physiological loading
computational modelling
author_facet Duda Georg N
Speirs Andrew
Kim Dong-Yeong
Taylor William R
Mehta Manav
Heller Markus O
Perka Carsten
author_sort Duda Georg N
title Influence of prosthesis design and implantation technique on implant stresses after cementless revision THR
title_short Influence of prosthesis design and implantation technique on implant stresses after cementless revision THR
title_full Influence of prosthesis design and implantation technique on implant stresses after cementless revision THR
title_fullStr Influence of prosthesis design and implantation technique on implant stresses after cementless revision THR
title_full_unstemmed Influence of prosthesis design and implantation technique on implant stresses after cementless revision THR
title_sort influence of prosthesis design and implantation technique on implant stresses after cementless revision thr
publisher BMC
series Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Research
issn 1749-799X
publishDate 2011-05-01
description <p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Femoral offset influences the forces at the hip and the implant stresses after revision THR. For extended bone defects, these forces may cause considerable bending moments within the implant, possibly leading to implant failure. This study investigates the influences of femoral anteversion and offset on stresses in the Wagner SL revision stem implant under varying extents of bone defect conditions.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Wagner SL revision stems with standard (34 mm) and increased offset (44 mm) were virtually implanted in a model femur with bone defects of variable extent (Paprosky I to IIIb). Variations in surgical technique were simulated by implanting the stems each at 4° or 14° of anteversion. Muscle and joint contact forces were applied to the reconstruction and implant stresses were determined using finite element analyses.</p> <p><b>Results</b></p> <p>Whilst increasing the implant's offset by 10 mm led to increased implant stresses (16.7% in peak tensile stresses), altering anteversion played a lesser role (5%). Generally, larger stresses were observed with reduced bone support: implant stresses increased by as much as 59% for a type IIIb defect. With increased offset, the maximum tensile stress was 225 MPa.</p> <p><b>Conclusion</b></p> <p>Although increased stresses were observed within the stem with larger offset and increased anteversion, these findings indicate that restoration of offset, key to restoring joint function, is unlikely to result in excessive implant stresses under routine activities if appropriate fixation can be achieved.</p>
topic revision hip arthroplasty
implant stresses
implant design
surgical technique
physiological loading
computational modelling
url http://www.josr-online.com/content/6/1/20
work_keys_str_mv AT dudageorgn influenceofprosthesisdesignandimplantationtechniqueonimplantstressesaftercementlessrevisionthr
AT speirsandrew influenceofprosthesisdesignandimplantationtechniqueonimplantstressesaftercementlessrevisionthr
AT kimdongyeong influenceofprosthesisdesignandimplantationtechniqueonimplantstressesaftercementlessrevisionthr
AT taylorwilliamr influenceofprosthesisdesignandimplantationtechniqueonimplantstressesaftercementlessrevisionthr
AT mehtamanav influenceofprosthesisdesignandimplantationtechniqueonimplantstressesaftercementlessrevisionthr
AT hellermarkuso influenceofprosthesisdesignandimplantationtechniqueonimplantstressesaftercementlessrevisionthr
AT perkacarsten influenceofprosthesisdesignandimplantationtechniqueonimplantstressesaftercementlessrevisionthr
_version_ 1726004746885529600