Cargando…

Osteochondral resurfacing implantation angle is more important than implant material stiffness

Osteochondral resurfacing implants are a promising treatment for focal cartilage defects. Several implant‐factors may affect the clinical outcome of this treatment, such as the implant material stiffness and the accuracy of implant placement, known to be challenging. In general, softer implants are...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Heuijerjans, Ashley, Wilson, Wouter, Ito, Keita, van Donkelaar, Corrinus C.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2018
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6586006/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29943463
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/jor.24101
_version_ 1783428818937053184
author Heuijerjans, Ashley
Wilson, Wouter
Ito, Keita
van Donkelaar, Corrinus C.
author_facet Heuijerjans, Ashley
Wilson, Wouter
Ito, Keita
van Donkelaar, Corrinus C.
author_sort Heuijerjans, Ashley
collection PubMed
description Osteochondral resurfacing implants are a promising treatment for focal cartilage defects. Several implant‐factors may affect the clinical outcome of this treatment, such as the implant material stiffness and the accuracy of implant placement, known to be challenging. In general, softer implants are expected to be more accommodating for implant misalignment than stiffer implants, and motion is expected to increase effects from implant misalignment and stiffness. 3D finite element models of cartilage/cartilage contact were employed in which implantation angle (0°, 5°, 10°) and implant material stiffness (E = 5 MPa, 100 MPa, 2 GPa) were varied. A creep loading (0.6 MPa) was simulated, followed by a sliding motion. Creep loading resulted in low maximum collagen strains of 2.5% in the intact case compared to 11.7% with an empty defect. Implants mostly positively affected collagen strains, deviatoric strains, and hydrostatic pressures in the adjacent cartilage, but these effects were superior for correct alignment (0°). The main effect of implant misalignment was bulging of opposing cartilage tissue into the gap caused by the misalignment. This increased collagen strains and hydrostatic pressures. Deviatoric strains were increased adjacent to the gap. Subsequent sliding initially increased strains for a stiff, misaligned implant, but generally sliding decreased strains. In conclusion, implants can decrease the detrimental effect of defects, but correct implant alignment is crucial, more than implant material stiffness. Implant misalignment causes a gap, causing potentially damaging cartilage deformation during prolonged loading, for example, standing, even for soft implants. Mild motion may positively affect the cartilage. © 2018 The Authors. Journal of Orthopaedic Research® published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. on behalf of Orthopaedic Research Society. J Orthop Res 36:2911–2922, 2018.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6586006
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2018
publisher John Wiley and Sons Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-65860062019-06-27 Osteochondral resurfacing implantation angle is more important than implant material stiffness Heuijerjans, Ashley Wilson, Wouter Ito, Keita van Donkelaar, Corrinus C. J Orthop Res Research Articles Osteochondral resurfacing implants are a promising treatment for focal cartilage defects. Several implant‐factors may affect the clinical outcome of this treatment, such as the implant material stiffness and the accuracy of implant placement, known to be challenging. In general, softer implants are expected to be more accommodating for implant misalignment than stiffer implants, and motion is expected to increase effects from implant misalignment and stiffness. 3D finite element models of cartilage/cartilage contact were employed in which implantation angle (0°, 5°, 10°) and implant material stiffness (E = 5 MPa, 100 MPa, 2 GPa) were varied. A creep loading (0.6 MPa) was simulated, followed by a sliding motion. Creep loading resulted in low maximum collagen strains of 2.5% in the intact case compared to 11.7% with an empty defect. Implants mostly positively affected collagen strains, deviatoric strains, and hydrostatic pressures in the adjacent cartilage, but these effects were superior for correct alignment (0°). The main effect of implant misalignment was bulging of opposing cartilage tissue into the gap caused by the misalignment. This increased collagen strains and hydrostatic pressures. Deviatoric strains were increased adjacent to the gap. Subsequent sliding initially increased strains for a stiff, misaligned implant, but generally sliding decreased strains. In conclusion, implants can decrease the detrimental effect of defects, but correct implant alignment is crucial, more than implant material stiffness. Implant misalignment causes a gap, causing potentially damaging cartilage deformation during prolonged loading, for example, standing, even for soft implants. Mild motion may positively affect the cartilage. © 2018 The Authors. Journal of Orthopaedic Research® published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. on behalf of Orthopaedic Research Society. J Orthop Res 36:2911–2922, 2018. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2018-07-13 2018-11 /pmc/articles/PMC6586006/ /pubmed/29943463 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/jor.24101 Text en © 2018 The Authors. Journal of Orthopaedic Research® published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. on behalf of Orthopaedic Research Society. This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ License, which permits use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Research Articles
Heuijerjans, Ashley
Wilson, Wouter
Ito, Keita
van Donkelaar, Corrinus C.
Osteochondral resurfacing implantation angle is more important than implant material stiffness
title Osteochondral resurfacing implantation angle is more important than implant material stiffness
title_full Osteochondral resurfacing implantation angle is more important than implant material stiffness
title_fullStr Osteochondral resurfacing implantation angle is more important than implant material stiffness
title_full_unstemmed Osteochondral resurfacing implantation angle is more important than implant material stiffness
title_short Osteochondral resurfacing implantation angle is more important than implant material stiffness
title_sort osteochondral resurfacing implantation angle is more important than implant material stiffness
topic Research Articles
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6586006/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29943463
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/jor.24101
work_keys_str_mv AT heuijerjansashley osteochondralresurfacingimplantationangleismoreimportantthanimplantmaterialstiffness
AT wilsonwouter osteochondralresurfacingimplantationangleismoreimportantthanimplantmaterialstiffness
AT itokeita osteochondralresurfacingimplantationangleismoreimportantthanimplantmaterialstiffness
AT vandonkelaarcorrinusc osteochondralresurfacingimplantationangleismoreimportantthanimplantmaterialstiffness