Cargando…

In vitro comparison of the effects of rough and polished stem surface finish on pressure generation in cemented hip arthroplasty

Background and purpose High pressures around implants can cause bone lysis and loosening. We investigated how pressures are generated around cemented femoral stems. Method We compared the pressures generated by rough and polished tapered stems at their cement interfaces, in an in vitro model, before...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Bartlett, Gavin E, Beard, David J, Murray, David W, Gill, Harinderjit S
Formato: Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Informa Healthcare 2009
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2823172/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19404793
http://dx.doi.org/10.3109/17453670902876755
_version_ 1782177609348546560
author Bartlett, Gavin E
Beard, David J
Murray, David W
Gill, Harinderjit S
author_facet Bartlett, Gavin E
Beard, David J
Murray, David W
Gill, Harinderjit S
author_sort Bartlett, Gavin E
collection PubMed
description Background and purpose High pressures around implants can cause bone lysis and loosening. We investigated how pressures are generated around cemented femoral stems. Method We compared the pressures generated by rough and polished tapered stems at their cement interfaces, in an in vitro model, before and after 1 million load cycles. Results At the start of the study, the loading of both polished and rough stems generated interface pressures that were not statistically significantly different. After 1 million load cycles, the rough stems generated greater interface pressures than at the start (p = 0.03), with maximum pressure wave amplitudes of 450,000 Pa or 3,375 mm Hg. The pressures generated by polished stems were similar before and after 1 million load cycles, and were lower than the pressures generated by the rough stems (p = 0.01). Stem loading caused micromotion between the stem and cement. Polished stems migrated distally in the cement but retained rotational and axial stability. The rough stems also migrated distally and wore the cement mantle, leading to increased rotational instability. Interpretation The change in the rotational micromotion of the rough stem is likely to be the principal cause of the increased stem pump output and to be a key factor in the longevity of cemented femoral implants.
format Text
id pubmed-2823172
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2009
publisher Informa Healthcare
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-28231722010-02-18 In vitro comparison of the effects of rough and polished stem surface finish on pressure generation in cemented hip arthroplasty Bartlett, Gavin E Beard, David J Murray, David W Gill, Harinderjit S Acta Orthop Research Article Background and purpose High pressures around implants can cause bone lysis and loosening. We investigated how pressures are generated around cemented femoral stems. Method We compared the pressures generated by rough and polished tapered stems at their cement interfaces, in an in vitro model, before and after 1 million load cycles. Results At the start of the study, the loading of both polished and rough stems generated interface pressures that were not statistically significantly different. After 1 million load cycles, the rough stems generated greater interface pressures than at the start (p = 0.03), with maximum pressure wave amplitudes of 450,000 Pa or 3,375 mm Hg. The pressures generated by polished stems were similar before and after 1 million load cycles, and were lower than the pressures generated by the rough stems (p = 0.01). Stem loading caused micromotion between the stem and cement. Polished stems migrated distally in the cement but retained rotational and axial stability. The rough stems also migrated distally and wore the cement mantle, leading to increased rotational instability. Interpretation The change in the rotational micromotion of the rough stem is likely to be the principal cause of the increased stem pump output and to be a key factor in the longevity of cemented femoral implants. Informa Healthcare 2009-04-29 2009-04-01 /pmc/articles/PMC2823172/ /pubmed/19404793 http://dx.doi.org/10.3109/17453670902876755 Text en Copyright: © Nordic Orthopedic Federation http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.5/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Noncommercial License which permits any noncommercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the source is credited.
spellingShingle Research Article
Bartlett, Gavin E
Beard, David J
Murray, David W
Gill, Harinderjit S
In vitro comparison of the effects of rough and polished stem surface finish on pressure generation in cemented hip arthroplasty
title In vitro comparison of the effects of rough and polished stem surface finish on pressure generation in cemented hip arthroplasty
title_full In vitro comparison of the effects of rough and polished stem surface finish on pressure generation in cemented hip arthroplasty
title_fullStr In vitro comparison of the effects of rough and polished stem surface finish on pressure generation in cemented hip arthroplasty
title_full_unstemmed In vitro comparison of the effects of rough and polished stem surface finish on pressure generation in cemented hip arthroplasty
title_short In vitro comparison of the effects of rough and polished stem surface finish on pressure generation in cemented hip arthroplasty
title_sort in vitro comparison of the effects of rough and polished stem surface finish on pressure generation in cemented hip arthroplasty
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2823172/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19404793
http://dx.doi.org/10.3109/17453670902876755
work_keys_str_mv AT bartlettgavine invitrocomparisonoftheeffectsofroughandpolishedstemsurfacefinishonpressuregenerationincementedhiparthroplasty
AT bearddavidj invitrocomparisonoftheeffectsofroughandpolishedstemsurfacefinishonpressuregenerationincementedhiparthroplasty
AT murraydavidw invitrocomparisonoftheeffectsofroughandpolishedstemsurfacefinishonpressuregenerationincementedhiparthroplasty
AT gillharinderjits invitrocomparisonoftheeffectsofroughandpolishedstemsurfacefinishonpressuregenerationincementedhiparthroplasty