Literature DB >> 27170535

Assembly force and taper angle difference influence the relative motion at the stem-neck interface of bi-modular hip prostheses.

Henning Haschke1, Sabrina Y Jauch-Matt2, Kay Sellenschloh3, Gerd Huber3, Michael M Morlock3.   

Abstract

Bi-modular hip arthroplasty prostheses allow adaptation to the individual patient anatomy and the combination of different materials but introduce an additional interface, which was related lately to current clinical issues. Relative motion at the additional taper interface might increase the overall risk of fretting, corrosion, metallic debris and early failure. The aim of this study was to investigate whether the assembly force influences the relative motion and seating behaviour at the stem-neck interface of a bi-modular hip prosthesis (Metha(®); Aesculap AG, Tuttlingen, Germany) and whether this relation is influenced by the taper angle difference between male and female taper angles. Neck adapters made of titanium (Ti6Al4V) and CoCr (CoCr29Mo) were assembled with a titanium stem using varying assembly forces and mechanically loaded. A contactless eddy current measurement system was used to record the relative motion between prosthesis stem and neck adapter. Higher relative motion was observed for Ti neck adapters compared to the CoCr ones (p < 0.001). Higher assembly forces caused increased seating distances (p < 0.001) and led to significantly reduced relative motion (p = 0.019). Independent of neck material type, prostheses with larger taper angle difference between male and female taper angles exhibited decreased relative motion (p < 0.001). Surgeons should carefully use assembly forces above 4 kN to decrease the amount of relative motion within the taper interface. Maximum assembly forces, however, should be limited to prevent periprosthetic fractures. Manufacturers should optimize taper angle differences to increase the resistance against relative motion. © IMechE 2016.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Modular prosthesis; assembly force; relative motion; stem–neck interface; taper angle difference

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27170535     DOI: 10.1177/0954411916648717

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Proc Inst Mech Eng H        ISSN: 0954-4119            Impact factor:   1.617


  5 in total

Review 1.  Corrosion of the Head-Stem Taper Junction-Are We on the Verge of an Epidemic?: Review Article.

Authors:  Michael Morlock; Dennis Bünte; Julian Gührs; Nicholas Bishop
Journal:  HSS J       Date:  2016-09-20

2.  Quantification of assembly forces during creation of head-neck taper junction considering soft tissue bearing: a biomechanical study.

Authors:  Toni Wendler; Torsten Prietzel; Robert Möbius; Jean-Pierre Fischer; Andreas Roth; Dirk Zajonz
Journal:  Arthroplasty       Date:  2021-05-01

3.  A parametric numerical analysis of femoral stem impaction.

Authors:  Nicholas E Bishop; Phil Wright; Martin Preutenborbeck
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2022-05-20       Impact factor: 3.240

4.  Retrieval Findings of Recalled Dual-Taper Hips.

Authors:  Anna Di Laura; Harry S Hothi; Johann Henckel; Young-Min Kwon; John A Skinner; Alister J Hart
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am       Date:  2018-10-03       Impact factor: 5.284

5.  Importance of surgical assembly technique on the engagement of 12/14 modular tapers.

Authors:  A Wade; F Webster; A R Beadling; M G Bryant
Journal:  Proc Inst Mech Eng H       Date:  2021-10-25       Impact factor: 1.617

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.