Literature DB >> 28552447

Same Same but Different? 12/14 Stem and Head Tapers in Total Hip Arthroplasty.

Ulrike Mueller1, Steffen Braun1, Stefan Schroeder1, Robert Sonntag1, J Philippe Kretzer1.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Taper corrosion has been identified to be a major concern in total hip arthroplasty during the past years. So far, the mechanisms that lead to taper corrosion in modular taper junctions are not fully understood. However, it has been shown that corrosion is also influenced by the geometry and topography of the taper, and these parameters vary among the implant manufacturers. The purpose of this study was to investigate the variations of common stem and head tapers regarding design and surface characteristics.
METHODS: An analysis of selected commercially available 12/14 stem and head tapers was performed. As geometric parameters, the taper angle, the opening taper diameter, and the taper length were measured using a coordinate measuring machine. Several topographic parameters were determined using a tactile roughness measurement instrument.
RESULTS: Although all investigated tapers are so-called 12/14 tapers, this study showed that the stem and head tapers differ among the manufacturers. The stem tapers were clearly different in both geometry and topography, and the range in variation of the topographic parameter was greater than it was for the geometric parameter. In contrast, the head tapers were different in their geometry, although not in topography.
CONCLUSION: Ultimately, this study provides an overview on the characteristics and variations of modular hip taper connections, and in addition, a new classification system regarding the surface finish is presented. These findings could be further considered in experimental corrosion or retrieval studies.
Copyright © 2017 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  corrosion; head-stem junction; modularity; taper; topography; total hip arthroplasty (THA)

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28552447     DOI: 10.1016/j.arth.2017.04.027

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Arthroplasty        ISSN: 0883-5403            Impact factor:   4.757


  6 in total

1.  Contact conditions for total hip head-neck modular taper junctions with microgrooved stem tapers.

Authors:  Maren Bechstedt; Jonathan A Gustafson; Steven P Mell; Julian Gührs; Michael M Morlock; Brett R Levine; Hannah J Lundberg
Journal:  J Biomech       Date:  2020-02-25       Impact factor: 2.712

Review 2.  What the Surgeon Can Do to Reduce the Risk of Trunnionosis in Hip Arthroplasty: Recommendations from the Literature.

Authors:  Claude B Rieker; Peter Wahl
Journal:  Materials (Basel)       Date:  2020-04-21       Impact factor: 3.623

3.  Effect of head size and rotation on taper corrosion in a hip simulator.

Authors:  Christian M Wight; Cari M Whyne; Earl R Bogoch; Radovan Zdero; Ryan M Chapman; Douglas W van Citters; William R Walsh; Emil Schemitsch
Journal:  Bone Jt Open       Date:  2021-11

4.  Model-Based Roentgen Stereophotogrammetric Analysis to Monitor the Head-Taper Junction in Total Hip Arthroplasty in Vivo-And They Do Move.

Authors:  Jing Xu; Robert Sonntag; J Philippe Kretzer; Dominic Taylor; Raimund Forst; Frank Seehaus
Journal:  Materials (Basel)       Date:  2020-03-27       Impact factor: 3.623

5.  Variability in stem taper surface topography affects the degree of corrosion and fretting in total hip arthroplasty.

Authors:  Kilian Elia Stockhausen; Christoph Riedel; Alex Victoria Belinski; Dorothea Rothe; Thorsten Gehrke; Felix Klebig; Matthias Gebauer; Michael Amling; Mustafa Citak; Björn Busse
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2021-04-30       Impact factor: 4.379

6.  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

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.