nach oben

Archives of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery

Erschienen in:

01.09.2017 | Hip Arthroplasty

Influence of undersized cementless hip stems on primary stability and strain distribution

verfasst von: Andreas Fottner, Matthias Woiczinski, Manuel Kistler, Christian Schröder, Tobias F. Schmidutz, Volkmar Jansson, Florian Schmidutz

Erschienen in: Archives of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery | Ausgabe 10/2017

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Abstract

Introduction

Undersizing of cementless hip stems is a risk factor for aseptic loosening and early subsidence. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effects of undersized stems and determine whether a biomechanical study can predict the clinical results.

Materials and methods

Three consecutive sizes of a clinically proven stem (CLS Spotorno) were implanted into six composite femora (size large, Sawbones^®), respectively. According to the Canal Fill Index (CFI), two stems (size 11.25 and 12.5) were undersized (CFI < 80%) and one stem (size 13.75) had an appropriate size (CFI > 80%). The primary stability was evaluated by measurement of 3-dimensional (3D)-micromotions under physiological adapted load and surface strains were recorded before and after implantation to detect stress-shielding processes.

Results

Both undersized stems revealed significantly higher micromotions in all regions compared to the appropriate stem. The highest micromotions were registered at the distal tip of the three stem sizes. The changes in surface strain did not show a significant difference between the three stem sizes, but the highest strain reduction was observed proximally indicating a tendency for stress shielding.

Conclusions

This study confirms the clinical assumption that undersized stem result in a significantly reduced primary stability. Furthermore, in vitro studies allow to determine the effects of undersizing and stress shielding processes.

Cherian JJ, Jauregui JJ, Banerjee S et al (2015) What host factors affect aseptic loosening after THA and TKA? Clin Orthop Relat Res 473(8):2700–2709CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Holt G, Murnaghan C, Reilly J, Meek RM (2007) The biology of aseptic osteolysis. Clin Orthop Relat Res 460:240–252PubMed

Buckwalter AE, Callaghan JJ, Liu SS et al (2006) Results of Charnley total hip arthroplasty with use of improved femoral cementing techniques. a concise follow-up, at a minimum of twenty-five years, of a previous report. J Bone Jt Surg Am 88(7):1481–1485

Rasquinha VJ, Ranawat CS, Dua V et al (2004) A prospective, randomized, double-blind study of smooth versus rough stems using cement fixation: minimum 5-year follow-up. J Arthroplast 19(7 Suppl 2):2–9CrossRef

Malchau H, Wang YX, Kärrholm J, Herberts P (1997) Scandinavian multicenter porous-coated anatomic total hip arthroplasty study. J Arthroplast 12:133–148CrossRef

Aldinger PR, Jung AW, Breusch SJ et al (2009) Survival of the cementless Spotorno stem in the second decade. Clin Orthop Relat Res 467(9):2297–2304CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Engh CA, Massin P (1989) Cementless total hip arthroplasty using the anatomic medullary locking stem. Results using a survivorship analysis. Clin Orthop Relat Res 249:141–158

Evola FR, Evola G, Graceffa A et al (2014) Performance of the CLS Spotorno uncemented stem in the third decade after implantation. Bone Jt J 96-B(4):455–461CrossRef

Hwang KT, Kim YH, Kim YS, Choi IY (2012) Total hip arthroplasty using cementless grit-blasted femoral component: a minimum 10-year follow-up study. J Arthroplast 27(8):1554–1561CrossRef

10.

Streit MR, Innmann MM, Merle C et al (2013) Long-term (20- to 25-year) results of an uncemented tapered titanium femoral component and factors affecting survivorship. Clin Orthop Relat Res 471(10):3262–3269CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

11.

Kim YH, Kim VE (1993) Early migration of uncemented porous coated anatomic femoral component related to aseptic loosening. Clin Orthop Relat Res 295:146–155

12.

Nam D, Sauber TJ, Barrack T et al (2015) Radiographic parameters associated with pain following total hip and surface arthroplasty. J Arthroplast 30(3):495–501CrossRef

13.

Laine HJ, Pajamäki KJ, Moilanen T, Lehto MU (2001) The femoral canal fill of two different cementless stem designs. The accuracy of radiographs compared to computed tomographic scanning. Int Orthop 25(4):209–213CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

14.

Laine HJ, Puolakka TJ, Moilanen T et al (2000) The effects of cementless femoral stem shape and proximal surface texture on ‘fit-and-fill’ characteristics and on bone remodeling. Int Orthop 24(4):184–190CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

15.

Gheduzzi S, Miles AW (2007) A review of pre-clinical testing of femoral stem subsidence and comparison with clinical data. Proc Inst Mech Eng H 221(1):39–46CrossRefPubMed

16.

Bieger R, Ignatius A, Reichel H, Dürselen L (2013) Biomechanics of a short stem: in vitro primary stability and stress shielding of a conservative cementless hip stem. J Orthop Res 31(8):1180–1186CrossRefPubMed

17.

Decking R, Puhl W, Simon U, Claes LE (2006) Changes in strain distribution of loaded proximal femora caused by different types of cementless femoral stems. Clin Biomech 21(5):495–501CrossRef

18.

Pilliar RM, Lee JM, Maniatopoulos C (1986) Observations on the effect of movement on bone ingrowth into porous-surface implants. Clin Orthop 208:108–113

19.

Enoksen CH, Gjerdet NR, Klaksvik J et al (2016) Deformation pattern and load transfer of an uncemented femoral stem with modular necks. An experimental study in human cadaver femurs. Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon) 32:28–33CrossRef

20.

Gardner MP, Chong AC, Pollock AG, Wooley PH (2010) Mechanical evaluation of large-size fourth-generation composite femur and tibia models. Ann Biomed Eng 38(3):613–620CrossRefPubMed

21.

Heiner AD (2008) Structural properties of fourth-generation composite femurs and tibias. J Biomech 41(15):3282–3284CrossRefPubMed

22.

Bergmann G, Deuretzbacher G, Heller M et al (2001) Hip contact forces and gait patterns from routine activities. J Biomech 34:859–871CrossRefPubMed

23.

Damm P, Schwachmeyer V, Dymke J et al (2013) In vivo hip joint loads during three methods of walking with forearm crutches. Clin Biomech 28(5):530–535CrossRef

24.

Fottner A, Peter CV, Schmidutz F et al (2011) Biomechanical evaluation of different offset versions of a cementless hip prosthesis by 3-dimensional measurement of micromotions. Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon) 26(8):830–835CrossRef

25.

Fottner A, Schmid M, Birkenmaier C et al (2009) Biomechanical evaluation of two types of short-stemmed hip prostheses compared to the trust plate prosthesis by three-dimensional measurement of micromotions. Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon) 24(5):429–434CrossRef

26.

Schmidutz F, Woiczinski M, Kistler M et al (2016) Influence of different sizes of composite femora on the biomechanical behavior of cementless hip prosthesis. Clin Biomech 41:60–65CrossRef

27.

Görtz W, Nägerl UV, Nägerl H, Thomsen M (2002) Spatial micromovements of uncemented femoral components after torsional loads. J Biomech Eng 124(6):706–713CrossRefPubMed

28.

Nadorf J, Thomsen M, Gantz S et al (2014) Fixation of the shorter cementless GTS™ stem: biomechanical comparison between a conventional and an innovative implant design. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 134(5):719–726CrossRefPubMed

29.

Pepke W, Nadorf J, Ewerbeck V et al (2014) Primary stability of the fitmore stem: biomechanical comparison. Int Orthop 38(3):483–488CrossRefPubMed

30.

Thomsen MN, Breusch SJ, Aldinger PR et al (2002) Robotically-milled bone cavities: a comparison with hand-broaching in different types of cementless hip stems. Acta Orthop Scand 73(4):379–385CrossRefPubMed

31.

Tullos HS, McCaskill BL, Dickey R, Davidson J (1984) Total hip arthroplasty with a low-modulus porous-coated femoral component. J Bone Jt Surg Am 66(6):888–898CrossRef

32.

Gamble P, de Beer J, Petruccelli D, Winemaker M (2010) The accuracy of digital templating in uncemented total hip arthroplasty. J Arthroplast 25(4):529–532CrossRef

33.

Kuroda K, Kabata T, Maeda T et al (2014) Do we need intraoperative radiographs for positioning the femoral component in total hip arthroplasty? Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 134(5):727–733CrossRefPubMed

34.

Rivera F, Leonardi F, Evangelista A, Pierannunzii L (2016) Risk of stem undersizing with direct anterior approach for total hip arthroplasty. Hip Int 26(3):249–253CrossRefPubMed

35.

Mayle RE, Della Valle CJ (2012) Intra-operative fractures during THA: see it before it sees us. J Bone Jt Surg Br 94(11 Suppl A):26–31CrossRef

36.

Bühler DW, Berlemann U, Lippuner K et al (1997) Three-dimensional primary stability of cementless femoral stems. Clin Biomech 12(2):75–86CrossRef

37.

Spotorno L, Romagnoli S, Ivaldo N et al (1993) The CLS system: theoretical concept and results. Acta Orthop Belg 59(Suppl 1):144–148PubMed

38.

Heller MO, Kassi JP, Perka C, Duda GN (2005) Cementless stem fixation and primary stability under physiological-like loads in vitro. Biomed Tech 50(12):394–399CrossRef

39.

Kassi JP, Heller MO, Stoeckle U et al (2005) Stair climbing is more critical than walking in pre-clinical assessment of primary stability in cementless THA in vitro. J Biomech 38(5):1143–1154CrossRefPubMed

40.

Floerkemeier T, Budde S, Hurschler C et al (2017) Influence of size and CCD-angle of a short stem hip arthroplasty on strain patterns of the proximal femur—an experimental study. Acta Bioeng Biomech 19(1):141–149PubMed

41.

Bieger R, Ignatius A, Decking R et al (2012) Primary stability and strain distribution of cementless hip stems as a function of implant design. Clin Biomech 27(2):158–164CrossRef

42.

Gronewold J, Berner S, Olender G et al (2014) Changes in strain patterns after implantation of a short stem with metaphyseal anchorage compared to a standard stem: an experimental study in synthetic bone. Orthop Rev (Pavia) 6(1):5211CrossRef

43.

Kim YH, Kim JS, Cho SH (2001) Strain distribution in the proximal human femur. An in vitro comparison in the intact femur and after insertion of reference and experimental femoral stems. J Bone Jt Surg Br 83(2):295–301CrossRef

44.

Wik TS, Enoksen C, Klaksvik J et al (2011) In vitro testing of the deformation pattern and initial stability of a cementless stem coupled to an experimental femoral head, with increased offset and altered femoral neck angles. Proc Inst Mech Eng H 225(8):797–808CrossRefPubMed

45.

Wolf O, Mattsson P, Milbrink J et al (2010) Periprosthetic bone mineral density and fixation of the uncemented CLS stem related to different weight bearing regimes: a randomized study using DXA and RSA in 38 patients followed for 5 years. Acta Orthop 81(3):286–291CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

46.

Salemyr M, Muren O, Ahl T et al (2015) Lower periprosthetic bone loss and good fixation of an ultra-short stem compared to a conventional stem in uncemented total hip arthroplasty. Acta Orthop 86(6):659–666CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

47.

Sköldenberg OG, Bodén HS, Salemyr MO et al (2006) Periprosthetic proximal bone loss after uncemented hip arthroplasty is related to stem size: DXA measurements in 138 patients followed for 2–7 years. Acta Orthop 77(3):386–392CrossRefPubMed

48.

Dorr LD, Faugere MC, Mackel AM et al (1993) Structural and cellular assessment of bone quality of proximal femur. Bone 14(3):231–242CrossRefPubMed

Titel: Influence of undersized cementless hip stems on primary stability and strain distribution
verfasst von: Andreas Fottner
Matthias Woiczinski
Manuel Kistler
Christian Schröder
Tobias F. Schmidutz
Volkmar Jansson
Florian Schmidutz
Publikationsdatum: 01.09.2017
Verlag: Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Erschienen in: Archives of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery / Ausgabe 10/2017
Print ISSN: 0936-8051
Elektronische ISSN: 1434-3916
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00402-017-2784-x

Arthropedia

Grundlagenwissen der Arthroskopie und Gelenkchirurgie. Erweitert durch Fallbeispiele, Videos und Abbildungen.
» Jetzt entdecken

Neu im Fachgebiet Orthopädie und Unfallchirurgie

Notfall-TEP der Hüfte ist auch bei 90-Jährigen machbar

26.04.2024 Hüft-TEP Nachrichten

Ob bei einer Notfalloperation nach Schenkelhalsfraktur eine Hemiarthroplastik oder eine totale Endoprothese (TEP) eingebaut wird, sollte nicht allein vom Alter der Patientinnen und Patienten abhängen. Auch über 90-Jährige können von der TEP profitieren.

Arthroskopie kann Knieprothese nicht hinauszögern

25.04.2024 Gonarthrose Nachrichten

Ein arthroskopischer Eingriff bei Kniearthrose macht im Hinblick darauf, ob und wann ein Gelenkersatz fällig wird, offenbar keinen Unterschied.

Therapiestart mit Blutdrucksenkern erhöht Frakturrisiko

25.04.2024 Hypertonie Nachrichten

Beginnen ältere Männer im Pflegeheim eine Antihypertensiva-Therapie, dann ist die Frakturrate in den folgenden 30 Tagen mehr als verdoppelt. Besonders häufig stürzen Demenzkranke und Männer, die erstmals Blutdrucksenker nehmen. Dafür spricht eine Analyse unter US-Veteranen.

Ärztliche Empathie hilft gegen Rückenschmerzen

23.04.2024 Leitsymptom Rückenschmerzen Nachrichten

Personen mit chronischen Rückenschmerzen, die von einfühlsamen Ärzten und Ärztinnen betreut werden, berichten über weniger Beschwerden und eine bessere Lebensqualität.

Update Orthopädie und Unfallchirurgie

Bestellen Sie unseren Fach-Newsletter und bleiben Sie gut informiert.

Newsletter bestellen

Springer Medizin

Abstract

Introduction

Materials and methods

Results

Conclusions

Bitte loggen Sie sich ein, um Zugang zu diesem Inhalt zu erhalten

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 10/2017

Postoperative pain and patient satisfaction are not influenced by daytime and duration of knee and hip arthroplasty: a prospective cohort study

Exposure of medical staff to radiation during osteosynthesis of proximal femoral fracture: descriptive analysis and comparison of different devices

The challenging surgical treatment of closed distal humerus fractures in elderly and octogenarian patients: radiographic and functional outcomes with a minimum follow-up of 24 months

The female geriatric proximal humeral fracture: protagonist for straight antegrade nailing?

Dynamic hip screw and fibular strut graft for fixation of fresh femoral neck fracture with posterior comminution