Cargando…

Biomechanical evaluation of a new femoral stem design for total hip replacement in a canine model

PURPOSE: To evaluate the biomechanical properties of a novel total hip replacement femoral stem. METHODS: Eight pairs of femurs from dog cadavers were used. The femurs were separated into different groups. A novel femoral stem with a convex proximal portion (Stem B) was biomechanically evaluated and...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: de Faria, Luís Guilherme, Minto, Bruno Watanabe, Shimano, Antonio Carlos, Macedo, Ana Paula, Diogo, Lucia Maria Izique, Dreibi, Rafael Manzini, Nobile, Matheus, Santos, Wanderley Severo, Kawamoto, Fernando Yoiti Kitamura, Franco, Guilherme Galhardo, Dias, Luis Gustavo Gosuen Gonçalves
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Sociedade Brasileira para o Desenvolvimento da Pesquisa em Cirurgia 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8221799/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34161433
http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/ACB360506
Descripción
Sumario:PURPOSE: To evaluate the biomechanical properties of a novel total hip replacement femoral stem. METHODS: Eight pairs of femurs from dog cadavers were used. The femurs were separated into different groups. A novel femoral stem with a convex proximal portion (Stem B) was biomechanically evaluated and compared to awell-known veterinary collared stem (Stem A). Femoral stems were inserted into the contralateral femurs from the same dog, forming 16 constructs. A flexo-compression load was applied on the axial axis of each sample. Maximum strength, deflection, stiffness, and energy absorption were analysed. RESULTS: Group B constructs showed significantly higher values (p ? 0.05) for the variables, except stiffness. The mean maximum strength was 1,347 ± 357 N for Group A and 1,805 ± 123 N for Group B (p ? 0.0069). The mean deflection was5.54 ± 2.63 mm for Group A and 10.03 ± 3.99 mm for Group B (p ? 0.0056). For the energy variable, the force was 6,203 ± 3,488 N/mm for Group A and 12,885 ± 5,056 N/mm for Group B (p ? 0.0054). Stem B had greater maximum strength, deflection, and energy. CONCLUSIONS: The new stem was effective in neutralizing the impact of axial flexion-compression stresses during biomechanical tests in cadaveric models.