Cargando…

Bone preserving level of osteotomy in short-stem total hip arthroplasty does not influence stress shielding dimensions – a comparing finite elements analysis

BACKGROUND: The main objective of every new development in total hip arthroplasty (THA) is the longest possible survival of the implant. Periprosthetic stress shielding is a scientifically proven phenomenon which leads to inadvertent bone loss. So far, many studies have analysed whether implanting d...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Burchard, Rene, Braas, Sabrina, Soost, Christian, Graw, Jan Adriaan, Schmitt, Jan
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2017
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5545828/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28784121
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12891-017-1702-2
_version_ 1783255491414065152
author Burchard, Rene
Braas, Sabrina
Soost, Christian
Graw, Jan Adriaan
Schmitt, Jan
author_facet Burchard, Rene
Braas, Sabrina
Soost, Christian
Graw, Jan Adriaan
Schmitt, Jan
author_sort Burchard, Rene
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: The main objective of every new development in total hip arthroplasty (THA) is the longest possible survival of the implant. Periprosthetic stress shielding is a scientifically proven phenomenon which leads to inadvertent bone loss. So far, many studies have analysed whether implanting different hip stem prostheses result in significant preservation of bone stock. The aim of this preclinical study was to investigate design-depended differences of the stress shielding effect after implantation of a selection of short-stem THA-prostheses that are currently available. METHODS: Based on computerised tomography (CT), a finite elements (FE) model was generated and a virtual THA was performed with different stem designs of the implant. Stems were chosen by osteotomy level at the femoral neck (collum, partial collum, trochanter sparing, trochanter harming). Analyses were performed with previously validated FE models to identify changes in the strain energy density (SED). RESULTS: In the trochanteric region, only the collum-type stem demonstrated a biomechanical behaviour similar to the native femur. In contrast, no difference in biomechanical behaviour was found between partial collum, trochanter harming and trochanter sparing models. All of the short stem-prostheses showed lower stress-shielding than a standard stem. CONCLUSION: Based on the results of this study, we cannot confirm that the design of current short stem THA-implants leads to a different stress shielding effect with regard to the level of osteotomy. Somehow unexpected, we found a bone stock protection in metadiaphyseal bone by simulating a more distal approach for osteotomy. Further clinical and biomechanical research including long-term results is needed to understand the influence of short-stem THA on bone remodelling and to find the optimal stem-design for a reduction of the stress shielding effect. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12891-017-1702-2) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5545828
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2017
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-55458282017-08-09 Bone preserving level of osteotomy in short-stem total hip arthroplasty does not influence stress shielding dimensions – a comparing finite elements analysis Burchard, Rene Braas, Sabrina Soost, Christian Graw, Jan Adriaan Schmitt, Jan BMC Musculoskelet Disord Research Article BACKGROUND: The main objective of every new development in total hip arthroplasty (THA) is the longest possible survival of the implant. Periprosthetic stress shielding is a scientifically proven phenomenon which leads to inadvertent bone loss. So far, many studies have analysed whether implanting different hip stem prostheses result in significant preservation of bone stock. The aim of this preclinical study was to investigate design-depended differences of the stress shielding effect after implantation of a selection of short-stem THA-prostheses that are currently available. METHODS: Based on computerised tomography (CT), a finite elements (FE) model was generated and a virtual THA was performed with different stem designs of the implant. Stems were chosen by osteotomy level at the femoral neck (collum, partial collum, trochanter sparing, trochanter harming). Analyses were performed with previously validated FE models to identify changes in the strain energy density (SED). RESULTS: In the trochanteric region, only the collum-type stem demonstrated a biomechanical behaviour similar to the native femur. In contrast, no difference in biomechanical behaviour was found between partial collum, trochanter harming and trochanter sparing models. All of the short stem-prostheses showed lower stress-shielding than a standard stem. CONCLUSION: Based on the results of this study, we cannot confirm that the design of current short stem THA-implants leads to a different stress shielding effect with regard to the level of osteotomy. Somehow unexpected, we found a bone stock protection in metadiaphyseal bone by simulating a more distal approach for osteotomy. Further clinical and biomechanical research including long-term results is needed to understand the influence of short-stem THA on bone remodelling and to find the optimal stem-design for a reduction of the stress shielding effect. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12891-017-1702-2) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. BioMed Central 2017-08-07 /pmc/articles/PMC5545828/ /pubmed/28784121 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12891-017-1702-2 Text en © The Author(s). 2017 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Research Article
Burchard, Rene
Braas, Sabrina
Soost, Christian
Graw, Jan Adriaan
Schmitt, Jan
Bone preserving level of osteotomy in short-stem total hip arthroplasty does not influence stress shielding dimensions – a comparing finite elements analysis
title Bone preserving level of osteotomy in short-stem total hip arthroplasty does not influence stress shielding dimensions – a comparing finite elements analysis
title_full Bone preserving level of osteotomy in short-stem total hip arthroplasty does not influence stress shielding dimensions – a comparing finite elements analysis
title_fullStr Bone preserving level of osteotomy in short-stem total hip arthroplasty does not influence stress shielding dimensions – a comparing finite elements analysis
title_full_unstemmed Bone preserving level of osteotomy in short-stem total hip arthroplasty does not influence stress shielding dimensions – a comparing finite elements analysis
title_short Bone preserving level of osteotomy in short-stem total hip arthroplasty does not influence stress shielding dimensions – a comparing finite elements analysis
title_sort bone preserving level of osteotomy in short-stem total hip arthroplasty does not influence stress shielding dimensions – a comparing finite elements analysis
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5545828/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28784121
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12891-017-1702-2
work_keys_str_mv AT burchardrene bonepreservinglevelofosteotomyinshortstemtotalhiparthroplastydoesnotinfluencestressshieldingdimensionsacomparingfiniteelementsanalysis
AT braassabrina bonepreservinglevelofosteotomyinshortstemtotalhiparthroplastydoesnotinfluencestressshieldingdimensionsacomparingfiniteelementsanalysis
AT soostchristian bonepreservinglevelofosteotomyinshortstemtotalhiparthroplastydoesnotinfluencestressshieldingdimensionsacomparingfiniteelementsanalysis
AT grawjanadriaan bonepreservinglevelofosteotomyinshortstemtotalhiparthroplastydoesnotinfluencestressshieldingdimensionsacomparingfiniteelementsanalysis
AT schmittjan bonepreservinglevelofosteotomyinshortstemtotalhiparthroplastydoesnotinfluencestressshieldingdimensionsacomparingfiniteelementsanalysis