| Literature DB >> 17150125 |
R Michael Meneghini1, Nadim J Hallab, Richard A Berger, Joshua J Jacobs, Wayne G Paprosky, Aaron G Rosenberg.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Proximal femoral bone loss during revision hip arthroplasty often requires bypassing the deficient metaphyseal bone to obtain distal fixation. The purpose of this study was to determine the effect of stem diameter and length of diaphyseal contact in achieving rotational stability in revision total hip arthroplasty.Entities:
Year: 2006 PMID: 17150125 PMCID: PMC1635007 DOI: 10.1186/1749-799X-1-5
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Orthop Surg Res ISSN: 1749-799X Impact factor: 2.359
Figure 1Instron testing machine setup with load cell attached to implanted femoral component. LVDT is seated on widest part of the femoral component flange.
Results of mean torsional resistance for studied stem diameters and diaphyseal contact depths. Group Mean Torsional Resistance Data *
| SD: | 2.51 | 1.97 | 5.17 | 8.02 | 0.0939 | |
| SD: | 1.26 | 2.49 | 5.15 | 5.82 | 0.0695 | |
| SD: | 7.42 | 9.16 | 15.38 | 15.54 | 0.1666 | |
| SD: | 2.67 | 2.85 | 4.34 | 6.14 | 0.0741 | |
| SD: | 3.36 | 4.5 | 8.13 | 7.16 | 0.086 | |
| SD: | 1.58 | 1.79 | 2.34 | 3.16 | 0.0242 | |
* all units are Newton-meters (Nm) except interface stiffness
ε = interface stiffness (um/Nm)
Figure 24 cm diaphyseal contact length (depth) data for both 18 mm and 15 mm diameter stems at the four points of measured rotational micromotion.
Figure 33 cm diaphyseal contact length (depth) data for both 18 mm and 15 mm diameter stems at the four points of measured rotational micromotion.
Figure 42 cm diaphyseal contact length (depth) data for both 18 mm and 15 mm diameter stems at the four points of measured rotational micromotion.
Figure 5Interface stiffness (ε) data for both 18 mm and 15 mm diameter stems at the various diaphyseal contact lengths.