The influence of uncemented femoral stem length and design on its primary stability: a finite element analysis

References

• Abdul KadirMR, HansenUN. 2007. The effect of physiological load configuration on interface micromotion in cementless femoral stems. Jurnal Mekanical. 23:50–61.
   Google Scholar
• Abdul KadirMR, KamsahN. 2009. Interface micromotion of cementless hip stems in simulated hip arthroplasty. Am J Appl Sci. 6:1682–1689.
   Google Scholar
• Abdul KadirMR, HansenUN, HansenU, KlabundeR, LucasD, AmisA. 2008. Finite element modelling of primary hip stem stability: the effect of interference fit. J Biomech. 41:587–594.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• AndoM, ImuraS, OmoriH, OkumuraY, BoA, BabaH. 1999. Nonlinear three-dimensional finite element analysis of newly designed cementless total hip stems. Artif Organs. 23:339–346.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Australian Orthopaedic Association National Joint Replacement Registry. 2010. Annual report. Adelaide: AOA.
   Google Scholar
• BacaV, HorakZ, MikulenkaP, DzupaV. 2008. Comparison of an inhomogeneous orthotropic and isotropic material models used for FE analyses. Med Eng Phys. 30:924–930.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• BergmannG, DeuretzbacherG, HellerM, GraichenF, RohlmannA, StraussJ, DudaGN. 2001. Hip joint forces and gait patterns from routine activities. J Biomech. 34:859–871.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• BernakiewiczM, VicecontiM. 2002. The role of parameter identification in finite element contact analyses with reference to orthopaedic biomechanics applications. J Biomech. 35:61–67.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• BerzinsA, SummerDR, AndriacchiTP, GalanteJO. 1993. Stem curvature and load angle influence the initial relative bone-implant motion of cementless femoral stem. J Orthop Res. 11:758–769.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• CallaghanJJ, FulghumCS, GlissonRR, StranneSK. 1992. The effect of femoral stem geometry on interface motion in uncemented porous-coated total hip prostheses. Comparison of straight-stem and curved-stem designs. J Bone Joint Surg. 74:839–848.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• DucheminL, BoussonV, RoassanalyC, BergotC, LaredoJD, SkalliW, MittonD. 2008. Prediction of mechanical properties of cortical bone by quantitative computed tomography. Med Eng Phys. 30:321–328.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• GarelickG, KärrholmJ, RogmarkC, HerbertsP. 2008. Swedish hip arthroplasty register annual report 2008. Department of Orthopaedics, Sablgrenska University Hospital, Sweden ISBN 978-91-977112-5-8, October 2009.
   Google Scholar
• GrantJA, BishopNE, GötzenN, SpecherC, HonlM, MorlockMM. 2007. Artificial composite bone as a model of human trabecular bone: the implant-bone interface. J Biomech. 40:1158–1164.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• HeinerAD. 2008. Structural properties of fourth-generation composite femurs and tibias. J Biomech. 40:3615–3625.
   Google Scholar
• HonlM, DiebkO, GauckC, CarreroV, LampeF, DriesS, QuanteM, SchweigerK, HilleE, MorlockM. 2003. Comparison of robotic-assisted and manual implantation of a primary total hip replacement. J Bone Joint Surg. 8:1470–1478.
   Google Scholar
• HowardJL, HuiAJ, BourneRB, McCaldenRW, McDonaldSJ, RorabeckCH. 2004. A quantitative analysis of bone support comparing cementless tapered and distal fixation total hip replacement. J Arthroplasty. 19:266–273.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• HuaJ, WalkerPS. 1994. Relative motion of hip stems under load. An in vitro study of symmetrical, asymmetrical, and custom asymmetrical designs. J Bone Joint Surg. 76:95–103.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• KassiJP, HellerMO, StoeckleU, PerkaC, DudaGN. 2005. Stair climbing is more critical than walking in pre-clinical assessment of primary stability in cementless THA in vitro. J Biomech. 38:1143–1154.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• KimYH, KimJS, JooJH, ParkJW. 2011. A prospective short term outcome study of a short metaphyseal fitting total hip arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty. 27:88–94.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• LearmonthID. 2005. Conservative hip implants. Curr Orthop. 19:255–262.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• MandellJA, CarterDR, GoodmanSB, SchurmanDJ, BeaupréGS. 2004. A conical-collared intramedullary stem can improve stress transfer and limit micromotion. Clin Biomech. 19:695–703.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• MolliRG, LombardiAV, Jr, BerendKR, AdamsJB, SnellerMA. 2012. A short tapered stem reduces intraoperative complications in primary total hip arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 470:450–461.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• MorlockM, SchneiderE, BluhmA, VollmerM, BergmannG, MüllerV, HolnM. 2001. Duration and frequency of everyday activities in total hip patients. J Biomech. 34:873–881.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• NoglerM, PolikeitA, WimmerC, BrücknerA, FergussonSJ, KrismerM. 2004. Primary stability of a robodoc® implanted anatomical stem versus manual implantation. Clin Biomech. 19:123–129.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• OstbyhaugPO, KlaksvikJ, RomundstadP, AamodtA. 2010. Primary stability of custom and anatomical uncemented femoral stems: a method for three-dimensional in vitro measurement of implant stability. Clin Biomech. 25:318–324.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• PancantiA, BernakiewiczM, VicecontiM. 2003. The primary stability of a cementless stem varies between subjects as much as between activities. J Biomech. 36:777–785.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• ParkY, ChoiDO, HwangDS, YoonYS. 2009. Statistical analysis of interfacial gap in a cementless stem FE model. J Biomech Eng. 131:1–8.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• ParkY, ShinHC, ChoiDO, AlbertC, YoonYS. 2008. Primary stability of cementless stem in THA improved with reduced interfacial gaps. J Biomech Eng. 130:1–7.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• PettersenSH, WikTS, SkallendB. 2009. Subject specific finite element analysis of implant stability for a cementless femoral stem. Clin Biomech. 24:480–487.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• PilliarRM, LeeJM, ManiatopoulosC. 1986. Observation of the effect of movement on bone ingrowth into porous-surfaced implants. Clin Orthop Relat Results. 208:108–113.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• ReggianiB, CristofoliniL, TaddeiF, VicecontiM. 2008. Sensitivity of the primary stability of a cementless hip stem to its position and orientation. Artif Organs. 32:555–560.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• ReggianiB, CristofoliniL, VariniE, VicecontiM. 2007. Predicting the subject-specific primary stability of cementless implants during pre-operative planning: preliminary validation of subject-specific finite-elements models. J Biomech. 40:2552–2558.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Reimeringer M, Gardan N, Danesi F, Gardan Y. 2007. CADFORSIM: methodology and tools to integrate CAD and simulation. Proceedings of the International Conference on Product Lifecycle Management, PLM07, Stezano, Italy.
   Google Scholar
• SakaiR, KanaiN, ItomanM, MabuchiK. 2006. Assessment of the fixation stiffness of some femoral stems of different designs. Clin Biomech. 21:370–378.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• SakaiR, SatoK, ItomanM, MabuchiK. 2009. Finite element analysis of the effect of proximal interlocking on primary fixation of the intra-medullary cruciate stem. J Orthop Sci. 14:85–95.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• SakaiT, SuganoN, NishiiT, HaraguchiK, OchiT, OhzonoK. 1999. Stem length and canal filling in uncemented custom-made total hip arthroplasty. Int Orthop. 23:219–223.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• SantoriN, LucidiM, SantoriFS. 2007. Proximal load transfer with a stemless uncemented femoral implant. J Orthop Traumatol. 7:154–160.
   Google Scholar
• SchoenfeldCM, LautenschlagerEP, MeyerPR, Jr. 1974. Mechanical properties of human cancellous bone in the femoral head. Med Biol Eng Comput. 12:313–317.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• SluimerJC, HoefnagelsNHM, EmansPJ, KuijerR, GeesinkRGT. 2006. Clinical, functional, and bone densitometry evaluation of patients randomized to a regular or modified hydroxyapatite-coated stem aimed at proximal fixation. J Arthroplasty. 21:344–352.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• VicecontiM, BrusiG, PancantiA, CristofoliniL. 2006. Primary stability of an anatomical cementless hip stem: a statistical analysis. J Biomech. 39:1169–1179.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• VicecontiM, CasaliM, MassariM, CristofoliniL, BassiniS, ToniA. 1996. The standardized femur program proposal for reference geometry to be used for the creation of finite element models of the femur. J Biomech. 29:1241.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• VicecontiM, MontiL, MucciniR, BernakiewiczM, ToniA. 2001. Even a thin layer of soft tissue may compromise the primary stability of cementless hip stems. Clin Biomech. 16:765–775.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• VicecontiM, MucciniR, BernakiewiczM, BaleaniM, CristofoliniL. 2000. Large-sliding contact elements accuracy predict levels of bone-implant micromotion relevant to osseointegration. J Biomech. 33:1611–1618.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• WirtzDC, SchiffersN, PandorfT, RadermacherK, WeichertD, ForstR. 2000. Critical evaluation of known bone material properties to realize anisotropic FE-simulation of the proximal femur. J Biomech. 33:1325–1330.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• WuLD, HahneHJ, HassenpflugJ. 2004. The dimensional accuracy of preparation of femoral cavity in cementless total hip arthroplasty. J Zheijiang Univ Sci. 5:1270–1278.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar