Fixation of the shorter cementless GTS™ stem: biomechanical comparison between a conventional and an innovative implant design

IntroductionConventional cementless total hip arthroplasty already shows very good clinical results. Nevertheless, implant revision is often accompanied by massive bone loss. The new shorter GTS™ stem has been introduced to conserve femoral bone stock. However, no long-term clinical results were available for this implant. A biomechanical comparison of the GTS™ stem with the clinically well-established CLS® stem was therefore preformed to investigate the targeted stem philosophy.Materials and methodsFour GTS™ stems and four CLS® stems were implanted in a standardized manner in eight synthetic femurs. A high-precision measuring device was used to determine micromotions of the stem and bone during different load applications. Calculation of relative micromotions at the bone–implant interface allowed the rotational implant stability and the bending behavior of the stem to be determined.ResultsLowest relative micromotions were detected near the lesser trochanter within the proximal part of both stems. Maximum relative micromotions were measured near the distal tip of the stems, indicating a proximal fixation of both stems. For the varus–valgus–torque application, a comparable stem bending behavior was shown for both stems.ConclusionBoth stems seem to provide a comparable and adequate primary stability. The shortened GTS™ design has a comparable rotational stability and bone–implant flexibility compared to a conventional stem. This study demonstrates that the CLS® stem and the GTS™ stem exhibit similar biomechanical behavior. However, a clinical confirmation of these experimental results is still required.

[1]  Henrik Malchau,et al.  A Review of Current Fixation Use and Registry Outcomes in Total Hip Arthroplasty: The Uncemented Paradox , 2013, Clinical orthopaedics and related research.

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

[3]  L. Haeberle,et al.  Stress-related femoral cortical and cancellous bone density loss after collum femoris preserving uncemented total hip arthroplasty: a prospective 7-year follow-up with quantitative computed tomography , 2012, Archives of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery.

[4]  G Bensmann,et al.  [Cementless fixation of endoprostheses]. , 1990, Biomedizinische Technik. Biomedical engineering.

[5]  T. Gotterbarm,et al.  High survival in young patients using a second generation uncemented total hip replacement , 2011, International Orthopaedics.

[6]  Robin L Bliss,et al.  Risk factors for revision of primary total hip arthroplasty: a systematic review , 2012, BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders.

[7]  L. Kinzl,et al.  Long-term results for the uncemented Zweymuller/Alloclassic hip endoprosthesis. A 15-year minimum follow-up of 320 hip operations. , 2009, The Journal of arthroplasty.

[8]  J. J. Morales De Cano,et al.  Early clinical results of a new conservative hip stem , 2014, European Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery & Traumatology.

[9]  N. Sugano,et al.  Correlation between femoral neck version and strain on the femur after insertion of femoral prosthesis , 2003, Journal of orthopaedic science : official journal of the Japanese Orthopaedic Association.

[10]  M. Thomsen,et al.  Messung der räumlichen Mikrobewegung des Femurschaftes von Endoprothesen in Abhängigkeit des räumlichen Kraftsystems , 2008 .

[11]  G. Logroscino,et al.  Bone Integration of New “Stemless” Hip Implants (Proxima Vs. Nanos). A DXA Study: Preliminary Results , 2011, International journal of immunopathology and pharmacology.

[12]  E. Steinhauser, Biomechanische Grundlagen der Implantatverankerung , 2006 .

[13]  R. Huiskes,et al.  The relationship between stress shielding and bone resorption around total hip stems and the effects of flexible materials. , 1992, Clinical orthopaedics and related research.

[14]  Sang‐Wan Shin,et al.  Comparison of implant stability after different implant surface treatments in dog bone , 2010, Journal of applied oral science : revista FOB.

[15]  Dr.-Ing. Günter Bensmann Über legungen zum Problem der zementlosen Fixation von Endoprothesen , 1990 .

[16]  Andreas Fottner,et al.  Biomechanical evaluation of two types of short-stemmed hip prostheses compared to the trust plate prosthesis by three-dimensional measurement of micromotions. , 2009, Clinical biomechanics.

[17]  Volkmar Jansson,et al.  Biomechanical evaluation of different offset versions of a cementless hip prosthesis by 3-dimensional measurement of micromotions. , 2011, Clinical biomechanics.

[18]  Jomar Klaksvik,et al.  Primary stability of custom and anatomical uncemented femoral stems: a method for three-dimensional in vitro measurement of implant stability. , 2010, Clinical biomechanics.

[19]  K Püschel,et al.  Migration and cyclic motion of a new short-stemmed hip prosthesis--a biomechanical in vitro study. , 2006, Clinical biomechanics.

[20]  M. Salai,et al.  Surgical approach and prosthesis fixation in hip arthroplasty world wide , 2013, Archives of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery.

[21]  F Kainberger,et al.  Changes in bone mineral density in the proximal femur after cementless total hip arthroplasty. A five-year longitudinal study. , 2004, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. British volume.

[22]  C. Heisel,et al.  Primary rotational stability of cylindrical and conical revision hip stems as a function of femoral bone defects: an in vitro comparison. , 2008, Journal of biomechanics.

[23]  N. Santori,et al.  Mid-term results of a custom-made short proximal loading femoral component. , 2010, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. British volume.

[24]  Laura Pavan,et al.  The DePuy Proxima™ Hip: A Short Stem for Total Hip Arthroplasty. Early Experience and Technical Considerations , 2009, Hip international : the journal of clinical and experimental research on hip pathology and therapy.

[25]  B. Skallerud,et al.  Subject specific finite element analysis of implant stability for a cementless femoral stem. , 2009, Clinical biomechanics.

[26]  J. Kärrholm,et al.  Does early micromotion of femoral stem prostheses matter? 4-7-year stereoradiographic follow-up of 84 cemented prostheses. , 1994, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. British volume.

[27]  Lutz Dürselen,et al.  Primary stability and strain distribution of cementless hip stems as a function of implant design. , 2012, Clinical biomechanics.

[28]  Clifford W Colwell,et al.  Cementless femoral fixation in total hip arthroplasty. , 2010, American journal of orthopedics.

[29]  H Nägerl,et al.  Spatial micromovements of uncemented femoral components after torsional loads. , 2002, Journal of biomechanical engineering.

[30]  K. Gustke Short stems for total hip arthroplasty: initial experience with the Fitmore stem. , 2012, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. British volume.

[31]  U. Schmidbauer,et al.  Dynamische Kräftemessung bei der Implantation von Total-Endoprothesen des Hüftgelenkes , 2007, Unfallchirurgie.

[32]  A. Amis,et al.  Finite element modelling of primary hip stem stability: the effect of interference fit. , 2008, Journal of biomechanics.

[33]  P. Sessa,et al.  Thigh pain, subsidence and survival using a short cementless femoral stem with pure metaphyseal fixation at minimum 9-year follow-up. , 2013, Orthopaedics & traumatology, surgery & research : OTSR.

[34]  C. Heisel,et al.  The effect of multifilaments and monofilaments on cementless femoral revision hip components: an experimental study. , 2011, Clinical biomechanics.

[35]  F. Falez,et al.  Perspectives on metaphyseal conservative stems , 2008, Journal of Orthopaedics and Traumatology.

[36]  R. Bitsch,et al.  A vibrational technique for diagnosing loosened total hip endoprostheses: an experimental sawbone study. , 2013, Medical engineering & physics.