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...
Autores principales: | , , , |
---|---|
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 |