Cargando…

Comparative Analysis of the Biomechanical Behaviour of Two Cementless Short Stems for Hip Replacement: Linea Anatomic and Minihip

A comparative study between two stems (Linea Anatomic and Minihip) has been performed in order to analyse the differences in their biomechanical behaviour, concerning stem micromotions and load transmission between stem and bone. From the corresponding finite element models, a parametric study was c...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Gabarre, Sergio, Herrera, Antonio, Ibarz, Elena, Mateo, Jesús, Gil-Albarova, Jorge, Gracia, Luis
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Public Library of Science 2016
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4938462/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27391328
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0158411
_version_ 1782441863423197184
author Gabarre, Sergio
Herrera, Antonio
Ibarz, Elena
Mateo, Jesús
Gil-Albarova, Jorge
Gracia, Luis
author_facet Gabarre, Sergio
Herrera, Antonio
Ibarz, Elena
Mateo, Jesús
Gil-Albarova, Jorge
Gracia, Luis
author_sort Gabarre, Sergio
collection PubMed
description A comparative study between two stems (Linea Anatomic and Minihip) has been performed in order to analyse the differences in their biomechanical behaviour, concerning stem micromotions and load transmission between stem and bone. From the corresponding finite element models, a parametric study was carried out to quantify ranges of micromotions taking into account: friction coefficient in the stem-bone interface, press-fit and two types of gait cycle. Micromotions were evaluated for each stem at six different levels along repeated gait cycles. An initial and marked stem subsidence at the beginning of the simulation was observed, followed by an asymptotic decrease due to friction forces. Once migration occurs, a repeated reversible cyclic micromotion is developed and stabilized as gait cycle times are simulated. The general motion pattern exhibited higher amplitude of micromotion for Minihip compared to Linea stem. The load transmission mechanism was analyzed, identifying the main internal forces. The results show higher local forces for Minihip stem up to 80% greater than for Linea stem. The differences of design between Minihip and Linea conditioned different distributions of load, influencing the posterior stress-shielding. Consequently, short stems require high bone stock and quality should, being indicated for young patients with high bone quality.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4938462
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2016
publisher Public Library of Science
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-49384622016-07-22 Comparative Analysis of the Biomechanical Behaviour of Two Cementless Short Stems for Hip Replacement: Linea Anatomic and Minihip Gabarre, Sergio Herrera, Antonio Ibarz, Elena Mateo, Jesús Gil-Albarova, Jorge Gracia, Luis PLoS One Research Article A comparative study between two stems (Linea Anatomic and Minihip) has been performed in order to analyse the differences in their biomechanical behaviour, concerning stem micromotions and load transmission between stem and bone. From the corresponding finite element models, a parametric study was carried out to quantify ranges of micromotions taking into account: friction coefficient in the stem-bone interface, press-fit and two types of gait cycle. Micromotions were evaluated for each stem at six different levels along repeated gait cycles. An initial and marked stem subsidence at the beginning of the simulation was observed, followed by an asymptotic decrease due to friction forces. Once migration occurs, a repeated reversible cyclic micromotion is developed and stabilized as gait cycle times are simulated. The general motion pattern exhibited higher amplitude of micromotion for Minihip compared to Linea stem. The load transmission mechanism was analyzed, identifying the main internal forces. The results show higher local forces for Minihip stem up to 80% greater than for Linea stem. The differences of design between Minihip and Linea conditioned different distributions of load, influencing the posterior stress-shielding. Consequently, short stems require high bone stock and quality should, being indicated for young patients with high bone quality. Public Library of Science 2016-07-08 /pmc/articles/PMC4938462/ /pubmed/27391328 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0158411 Text en © 2016 Gabarre et al http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
spellingShingle Research Article
Gabarre, Sergio
Herrera, Antonio
Ibarz, Elena
Mateo, Jesús
Gil-Albarova, Jorge
Gracia, Luis
Comparative Analysis of the Biomechanical Behaviour of Two Cementless Short Stems for Hip Replacement: Linea Anatomic and Minihip
title Comparative Analysis of the Biomechanical Behaviour of Two Cementless Short Stems for Hip Replacement: Linea Anatomic and Minihip
title_full Comparative Analysis of the Biomechanical Behaviour of Two Cementless Short Stems for Hip Replacement: Linea Anatomic and Minihip
title_fullStr Comparative Analysis of the Biomechanical Behaviour of Two Cementless Short Stems for Hip Replacement: Linea Anatomic and Minihip
title_full_unstemmed Comparative Analysis of the Biomechanical Behaviour of Two Cementless Short Stems for Hip Replacement: Linea Anatomic and Minihip
title_short Comparative Analysis of the Biomechanical Behaviour of Two Cementless Short Stems for Hip Replacement: Linea Anatomic and Minihip
title_sort comparative analysis of the biomechanical behaviour of two cementless short stems for hip replacement: linea anatomic and minihip
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4938462/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27391328
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0158411
work_keys_str_mv AT gabarresergio comparativeanalysisofthebiomechanicalbehaviouroftwocementlessshortstemsforhipreplacementlineaanatomicandminihip
AT herreraantonio comparativeanalysisofthebiomechanicalbehaviouroftwocementlessshortstemsforhipreplacementlineaanatomicandminihip
AT ibarzelena comparativeanalysisofthebiomechanicalbehaviouroftwocementlessshortstemsforhipreplacementlineaanatomicandminihip
AT mateojesus comparativeanalysisofthebiomechanicalbehaviouroftwocementlessshortstemsforhipreplacementlineaanatomicandminihip
AT gilalbarovajorge comparativeanalysisofthebiomechanicalbehaviouroftwocementlessshortstemsforhipreplacementlineaanatomicandminihip
AT gracialuis comparativeanalysisofthebiomechanicalbehaviouroftwocementlessshortstemsforhipreplacementlineaanatomicandminihip