Investigation into the affect of cementing techniques on load transfer in the resurfaced femoral head: a multi-femur finite element analysis.

BACKGROUND Femoral head resurfacing is a popular procedure for younger active hip replacement patients. Two major cementing techniques are used in femoral component fixation; producing varying cement mantle thicknesses. Each technique has benefits, but it is not known if cement mantle thickness is detrimental to load transfer within the proximal femur. METHODS This study uses computer tomography based finite element analysis to determine the effect of cement mantle thickness on strain in the resurfaced femoral head. A group of 16 femurs were investigated to take into account inter-patient variation; a factor often over-looked in such studies. FINDINGS Results showed strain in the proximal femoral head to decrease with increasing cement thickness, with a slight increase in strain in the posterior-superior neck. Cementing of the implant guide-pin produced marked reductions in strain in the head and neck except for the posterior-inferior neck; where it increased slightly. INTERPRETATION The study concluded that a thicker cement mantle increases strain shielding within the superior resurfaced femoral head; although short to medium term clinical trials do not suggest these factors to be of much concern. The analysis also found strain to increase around the inferior head-neck junction with a thinner mantle. Cementing the guide pin resulted in increased strain shielding whilst simultaneously shifting peak loads distally along the femoral neck. This work found that modelling a group of femurs was a useful tool for better interpreting the loading in the resurfaced femur.

[1]  G. Bergmann,et al.  Hip joint contact forces during stumbling , 2004, Langenbeck's Archives of Surgery.

[2]  Marco Viceconti,et al.  An improved method for the automatic mapping of computed tomography numbers onto finite element models. , 2004, Medical engineering & physics.

[3]  J. O'Connor,et al.  Strain distribution within the human femur due to physiological and simplified loading: Finite element analysis using the muscle standardized femur model , 2003, Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers. Part H, Journal of engineering in medicine.

[4]  A. T. Berman,et al.  The temperature problem at the bone-acrylic cement interface of the total hip replacement. , 1976, Clinical orthopaedics and related research.

[5]  G. Bergmann,et al.  Hip contact forces and gait patterns from routine activities. , 2001, Journal of biomechanics.

[6]  J Schatzker,et al.  A study of implant failure in the Wagner resurfacing arthroplasty. , 1985, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. American volume.

[7]  H. Amstutz,et al.  Fracture of the neck of the femur after surface arthroplasty of the hip. , 2004, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. American volume.

[8]  M. Freeman,et al.  ICLH surface replacement of the hip. An analysis of the first 10 years. , 1983, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. British volume.

[9]  T. Keaveny,et al.  Dependence of yield strain of human trabecular bone on anatomic site. , 2001, Journal of biomechanics.

[10]  Mark Taylor Finite element analysis of the resurfaced femoral head. , 2006 .

[11]  C. Turner,et al.  Yield behavior of bovine cancellous bone. , 1989, Journal of biomechanical engineering.

[12]  V. Jansson,et al.  Stress transfer at the femoral bone/bone cement interface as a function of the cement thickness , 2004, Archives of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery.

[13]  M Viceconti,et al.  Material properties assignment to finite element models of bone structures: a new method. , 1999, Medical engineering & physics.

[14]  S. Julious Sample sizes for clinical trials with Normal data , 2004, Statistics in medicine.

[15]  W Rüther,et al.  Biomechanical, morphological, and histological analysis of early failures in hip resurfacing arthroplasty , 2006, Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers. Part H, Journal of engineering in medicine.

[16]  R Huiskes,et al.  Interface stresses in the resurfaced hip. Finite element analysis of load transmission in the femoral head. , 1985, Acta orthopaedica Scandinavica.

[17]  P B Pynsent,et al.  Birmingham hip resurfacing arthroplasty. A minimum follow-up of five years. , 2005, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. British volume.

[18]  J H Keyak,et al.  Prediction of femoral fracture load using finite element models: an examination of stress- and strain-based failure theories. , 2000, Journal of biomechanics.

[19]  P. Campbell,et al.  Metal-on-metal hybrid surface arthroplasty: two to six-year follow-up study. , 2004, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. American volume.

[20]  H. Skinner,et al.  Prediction of femoral fracture load using automated finite element modeling. , 1997, Journal of biomechanics.

[21]  D. Back,et al.  Femoral neck fractures following Birmingham hip resurfacing: a national review of 50 cases. , 2005, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. British volume.

[22]  N Shiba,et al.  Biomechanical study of the resurfacing hip arthroplasty: finite element analysis of the femoral component. , 2000, The Journal of arthroplasty.

[23]  R. Pidaparti,et al.  A uniform strain criterion for trabecular bone adaptation: do continuum-level strain gradients drive adaptation? , 1997, Journal of biomechanics.

[24]  A Shimmin,et al.  Early results of primary Birmingham hip resurfacings. An independent prospective study of the first 230 hips. , 2005, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. British volume.

[25]  P. Pynsent,et al.  Metal on Metal Surface Replacement of the Hip: Experience of the McMinn Prosthesis , 1996, Clinical orthopaedics and related research.

[26]  M. Freeman Some anatomical and mechanical considerations relevant to the surface replacement of the femoral head. , 1978, Clinical orthopaedics and related research.

[27]  T. Keaveny,et al.  Uniaxial yield strains for bovine trabecular bone are isotropic and asymmetric , 1999, Journal of orthopaedic research : official publication of the Orthopaedic Research Society.

[28]  A Rohlmann,et al.  Hip Joint Forces During Load Carrying , 1997, Clinical orthopaedics and related research.

[29]  G. Bergmann,et al.  Hip joint loading during walking and running, measured in two patients. , 1993, Journal of biomechanics.

[30]  R. Huiskes,et al.  A clinical, radiological and biomechanical study of the TARA hip prosthesis , 2004, Archives of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery.

[31]  J H Keyak,et al.  Prediction of fracture location in the proximal femur using finite element models. , 2001, Medical engineering & physics.

[32]  J H Keyak,et al.  Automated three-dimensional finite element modelling of bone: a new method. , 1990, Journal of biomedical engineering.

[33]  G. Bergmann,et al.  Musculo-skeletal loading conditions at the hip during walking and stair climbing. , 2001, Journal of biomechanics.

[34]  K. An,et al.  Cement viscosity affects the bone‐cement interface in total hip arthroplasty , 1996, Journal of orthopaedic research : official publication of the Orthopaedic Research Society.

[35]  A. Briscoe,et al.  Cementing techniques in hip resurfacing , 2006, Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers. Part H, Journal of engineering in medicine.

[36]  R Huiskes,et al.  Post-loosening mechanical behavior of femoral resurfacing prostheses. , 1990, Clinical materials.

[37]  A. Perillo-Marcone,et al.  Assessment of the Effect of Mesh Density on the Material Property Discretisation Within QCT Based FE Models: A Practical Example Using the Implanted Proximal Tibia , 2003, Computer methods in biomechanics and biomedical engineering.

[38]  Marco Viceconti,et al.  The primary stability of a cementless stem varies between subjects as much as between activities. , 2003, Journal of biomechanics.