Literature DB >> 17493558

Evaluation of the glenoid implant survival using a biomechanical finite element analysis: influence of the implant design, bone properties, and loading location.

P Mansat1, J Briot, M Mansat, P Swider.   

Abstract

Total shoulder arthroplasty has become a successful surgical procedure through design improvements. However, lucent lines around the glenoid component are of major concern for leading to component loosening. To better understand the mechanism causing loosening, a finite element biomechanical model of an in vivo scapula was developed. The effect of eccentric loading was analyzed on a keel glenoid and a peg glenoid implant. Results indicated that eccentric loading greatly increases stresses in the cement mantle at the bone-cement interface, and no significant difference was predicted between keel and peg implants. The results suggested that eccentric loading is a likely cause for initiation of cracks in the cement layer especially on the posterior side. Moreover, these results, compared with other studies, indicate that geometric and bone properties of the scapula may be more important factors in the success of shoulder arthroplasty than implant design.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2006        PMID: 17493558     DOI: 10.1016/j.jse.2005.11.010

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Shoulder Elbow Surg        ISSN: 1058-2746            Impact factor:   3.019


  13 in total

Review 1.  Journey of the glenoid in anatomic total shoulder replacement.

Authors:  Alessandro Castagna; Raffaele Garofalo
Journal:  Shoulder Elbow       Date:  2018-08-01

2.  Management of complications after revision shoulder arthroplasty.

Authors:  Hithem Rahmi; Andrew Jawa
Journal:  Curr Rev Musculoskelet Med       Date:  2015-03

Review 3.  Shoulder resurfacing for treatment of focal defects and diffuse osteoarthritis.

Authors:  A Miniaci; M J Scarcella
Journal:  Orthopade       Date:  2021-02       Impact factor: 1.087

4.  Evaluation of thirty eight cemented pegged glenoid components with variable backside curvature: two-year minimum follow-up.

Authors:  Florence Dauzère; Marine Arboucalot; Julie Lebon; Fanny Elia; Nicolas Bonnevialle; Pierre Mansat
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2017-09-15       Impact factor: 3.075

5.  Multi-patient finite element simulation of keeled versus pegged glenoid implant designs in shoulder arthroplasty.

Authors:  Werner Pomwenger; Karl Entacher; Herbert Resch; Peter Schuller-Götzburg
Journal:  Med Biol Eng Comput       Date:  2015-04-08       Impact factor: 2.602

6.  Influence of implant number, length, and tilting degree on stress distribution in atrophic maxilla: a finite element study.

Authors:  Zeynep Gümrükçü; Yavuz Tolga Korkmaz
Journal:  Med Biol Eng Comput       Date:  2017-11-09       Impact factor: 2.602

7.  How to deal with glenoid type B2 or C? How to prevent mistakes in implantation of glenoid component?

Authors:  Jean Kany; Denis Katz
Journal:  Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol       Date:  2012-11-02

8.  Number of pegs influence focal stress distributions and micromotion in glenoid implants: a finite element study.

Authors:  Abdul Hadi Abdul Wahab; Mohammed Rafiq Abdul Kadir; Muhammad Noor Harun; Tunku Kamarul; Ardiyansyah Syahrom
Journal:  Med Biol Eng Comput       Date:  2016-06-02       Impact factor: 2.602

9.  Relationship Between Glenoid Component Shift and Osteolysis After Anatomic Total Shoulder Arthroplasty: Three-Dimensional Computed Tomography Analysis.

Authors:  Eric T Ricchetti; Bong-Jae Jun; Yuxuan Jin; Jason C Ho; Thomas E Patterson; Jarrod E Dalton; Kathleen A Derwin; Joseph P Iannotti
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am       Date:  2021-08-04       Impact factor: 6.558

10.  Can an extracorporeal glenoid aiming device be used to optimize the position of the glenoid component in total shoulder arthroplasty?

Authors:  Tom R G M Verstraeten; Bart Berghs; Alexander Van Tongel; David Volders; Lieven F De Wilde
Journal:  Int J Shoulder Surg       Date:  2015 Oct-Dec
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.