BACKGROUND: A hip replacement with a cemented or cementless femoral stem produces an effect on the bone called adaptive remodelling, attributable to mechanical and biological factors. All of the cementless prostheses designs try to achieve an optimal load transfer in order to avoid stress-shielding, which produces an osteopenia.Long-term densitometric studies taken after implanting ABG-I and ABG-II stems confirm that the changes made to the design and alloy of the ABG-II stem help produce less proximal atrophy of the femur. The simulation with FE allowed us to study the biomechanical behaviour of two stems. The aim of this study was, if possible, to correlate the biological and mechanical findings. METHODS: Both models with prostheses ABG-I and II have been simulated in five different moments of time which coincide with the DEXA measurements: postoperative, 6 months, 1, 3 and 5 years, in addition to the healthy femur as the initial reference. For the complete comparative analysis of both stems, all of the possible combinations of bone mass (group I and group II of pacients in two controlled studies for ABG-I and II stems, respectively), prosthetic geometry (ABG-I and ABG-II) and stem material (Wrought Titanium or TMZF) were simulated. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION: In both groups of bone mass an increase of stress in the area of the cancellous bone is produced, which coincides with the end of the HA coating, as a consequence of the bottleneck effect which is produced in the transmission of loads, and corresponds to Gruen zones 2 and 6, where no osteopenia can be seen in contrast to zones 1 and 7. CONCLUSIONS: In this study it is shown that the ABG-II stem is more effective than the ABG-I given that it generates higher tensional values on the bone, due to which proximal bone atrophy diminishes. This biomechanical behaviour with an improved transmission of loads confirmed by means of FE simulation corresponds to the biological findings obtained with Dual-Energy X-Ray Absorptiometry (DEXA).
BACKGROUND: A hip replacement with a cemented or cementless femoral stem produces an effect on the bone called adaptive remodelling, attributable to mechanical and biological factors. All of the cementless prostheses designs try to achieve an optimal load transfer in order to avoid stress-shielding, which produces an osteopenia.Long-term densitometric studies taken after implanting ABG-I and ABG-II stems confirm that the changes made to the design and alloy of the ABG-II stem help produce less proximal atrophy of the femur. The simulation with FE allowed us to study the biomechanical behaviour of two stems. The aim of this study was, if possible, to correlate the biological and mechanical findings. METHODS: Both models with prostheses ABG-I and II have been simulated in five different moments of time which coincide with the DEXA measurements: postoperative, 6 months, 1, 3 and 5 years, in addition to the healthy femur as the initial reference. For the complete comparative analysis of both stems, all of the possible combinations of bone mass (group I and group II of pacients in two controlled studies for ABG-I and II stems, respectively), prosthetic geometry (ABG-I and ABG-II) and stem material (Wrought Titanium or TMZF) were simulated. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION: In both groups of bone mass an increase of stress in the area of the cancellous bone is produced, which coincides with the end of the HA coating, as a consequence of the bottleneck effect which is produced in the transmission of loads, and corresponds to Gruen zones 2 and 6, where no osteopenia can be seen in contrast to zones 1 and 7. CONCLUSIONS: In this study it is shown that the ABG-II stem is more effective than the ABG-I given that it generates higher tensional values on the bone, due to which proximal bone atrophy diminishes. This biomechanical behaviour with an improved transmission of loads confirmed by means of FE simulation corresponds to the biological findings obtained with Dual-Energy X-Ray Absorptiometry (DEXA).
Authors: Antonio Herrera; Vicente Canales; John Anderson; Carlos García-Araujo; Antonio Murcia-Mazón; Alphons J Tonino Journal: Clin Orthop Relat Res Date: 2004-06 Impact factor: 4.176
Authors: Juan J Panisello; Vicente Canales; Luis Herrero; Antonio Herrera; Jesús Mateo; María J Caballero Journal: Int Orthop Date: 2008-01-11 Impact factor: 3.075
Authors: Antonio Herrera; Jesús Mateo; Jorge Gil-Albarova; Antonio Lobo-Escolar; Elena Ibarz; Sergio Gabarre; Yolanda Más; Luis Gracia Journal: Biomed Res Int Date: 2015-02-23 Impact factor: 3.411