Cargando…
Microseparation, fluid pressure and flow in failures of metal-on-metal hip resurfacing arthroplasties
OBJECTIVES: Metal-on-metal (MoM) hip resurfacing was introduced into clinical practice because it was perceived to be a better alternative to conventional total hip replacement for young and active patients. However, an increasing number of reports of complications have arisen focusing on design and...
Autores principales: | , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
British Editorial Society of Bone and Joint Surgery
2012
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3626193/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23610667 http://dx.doi.org/10.1302/2046-3758.13.2000040 |
Sumario: | OBJECTIVES: Metal-on-metal (MoM) hip resurfacing was introduced into clinical practice because it was perceived to be a better alternative to conventional total hip replacement for young and active patients. However, an increasing number of reports of complications have arisen focusing on design and orientation of the components, the generation of metallic wear particles and serum levels of metallic ions. The procedure introduced a combination of two elements: large-dimension components and hard abrasive particles of metal wear. The objective of our study was to investigate the theory that microseparation of the articular surfaces draws in a high volume of bursal fluid and its contents into the articulation, and at relocation under load would generate high pressures of fluid ejection, resulting in an abrasive water jet. METHODS: This theoretical concept using MoM resurfacing components (head diameter 55 mm) was modelled mathematically and confirmed experimentally using a material-testing machine that pushed the head into the cup at a rate of 1000 mm/min until fully engaged. RESULTS: The mathematical model showed the pattern but not the force of fluid ejection, the highest pressures were expected when the separation of the components was only a fraction of one millimetre. The experimental work confirmed the results; with the mean peak ejection pressure of 43 763 N/m(2) equivalent to 306 mmHg or 5 psi. CONCLUSIONS: The mechanical effect of the high-pressure abrasive water jet is the likely cause of the spectrum of complications reported with metal-on-metal resurfacing. Investigating serum levels of metallic elements may not be the best method for assessing the local mechanical effects of the abrasive water jet. |
---|