[The modular hip revision stem made of titanium alloy--influence and optimisation of bending stiffness].

UNLABELLED The MRP-Titan Revision stem has proved to be a highly successful implant system for revision arthroplasty of the hip. Good and excellent clinical and radiological results with spontaneous filling of bony defects have been reported, The observation of atrophy of the proximal femur associated with stem diameters > 17mm prompted us to examine the bending stiffness of stems of various diameters. To determine their static bending characteristics, the stems were tested under axial pressure loads in accordance with Euler's buckling case. Dynamic tests were performed with the mono-axial servohydraulic test equipment MTS 810. From a stem diameter of 18 mm upwards, deflection of the stem under loading decreased disproportionately, in direct correlation with the stem stiffness. By optimising the geometry and varying the alloy it is possible to obtain a constant ISD factor for the modular MRP-Titan revision stem CONCLUSION The MRP-Titan revision stem is a reliable implant system for revision arthroplasty of the hip. Clinical findings of atrophy of the proximal femur associated with stem diameters > 17 mm was found to be correlated with a disproportionate increase in bending stiffness. The aim of further developments will be to reduce the stiffness of larger-diameter stems by making changes to the design and/or to the alloy (Ti15Mo, Ti13Nb13Zr, Ti12Mo6Zr2Fe2).

[1]  J. Bobyn,et al.  Mechanical compatibility of noncemented hip prostheses with the human femur. , 1993, The Journal of arthroplasty.

[2]  W J Maloney,et al.  The Otto Aufranc Award. Skeletal response to well fixed femoral components inserted with and without cement. , 1996, Clinical orthopaedics and related research.

[3]  C. Engh,et al.  Factors affecting femoral bone remodeling after cementless total hip arthroplasty. , 1999, The Journal of arthroplasty.

[4]  A. Schuh,et al.  Cementless modular hip revision arthroplasty using the MRP Titan Revision Stem: outcome of 79 hips after an average of 4 years’ follow-up , 2004, Archives of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery.

[5]  C. Engh,et al.  Long-Term Clinical Consequences of Stress-Shielding after Total Hip Arthroplasty without Cement* , 1997, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. American volume.

[6]  C. Engh,et al.  Porous-coated hip replacement. The factors governing bone ingrowth, stress shielding, and clinical results. , 1987, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. British volume.

[7]  Engh Ca,et al.  The influence of stem size and extent of porous coating on femoral bone resorption after primary cementless hip arthroplasty. , 1988 .

[8]  C. Engh,et al.  Producing and avoiding stress shielding. Laboratory and clinical observations of noncemented total hip arthroplasty. , 1992, Clinical orthopaedics and related research.

[9]  K. Bose,et al.  Periprosthetic bone remodelling after cementless total hip replacement , 1997 .

[10]  H B Skinner,et al.  Correlation of Computed Finite Element Stresses to Bone Density After Remodeling Around Cementless Femoral Implants , 1994, Clinical orthopaedics and related research.

[11]  R. Crowninshield,et al.  A Low Stiffness Composite Biologically Fixed Prosthesis , 2001, Clinical orthopaedics and related research.

[12]  C. Engh,et al.  Effect of Femoral Stiffness on Bone Remodeling After Uncemented Arthroplasty , 2001, Clinical orthopaedics and related research.

[13]  D R Sumner,et al.  Functional adaptation and ingrowth of bone vary as a function of hip implant stiffness. , 1998, Journal of biomechanics.