Literature DB >> 7371271

The effect of femoral stem cross-sectional geometry on cement stresses in total hip reconstruction.

R D Crowninshield, R A Brand, R C Johnston, J C Milroy.   

Abstract

A three-dimensional numerical stress analysis of a prosthesis-cement-proximal femur system was performed to reveal functional differences of total hip femoral component stems with varying cross-sectional shapes. The analysis was performed on stem cross-section shapes similar to many of the variations presently available in femoral components. The results indicate that the predicted levels of stress in the cement are often close to critical (i.e., failure) levels. The magnitude and mode (i.e., compression versus tension) of loading in the cement are significantly affected by the stem cross-sectional shape. Particular attention is paid to the stress in the cement within the proximal portion of the structure. High compression stresses in the cement are shown to result from prostheses with narrow medial surfaces and small area moments of inertia. High cement tensile stresses result from prostheses with small area moments of inertia. A large region of cement compression results from prosthesis cross-sections with relatively large anterior-posterior dimensions about their lateral aspect. Desirable stress distributions result from prostheses with broad medial surfaces and even broader lateral surfaces.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1980        PMID: 7371271

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res        ISSN: 0009-921X            Impact factor:   4.176


  10 in total

1.  Richard C. Johnston, M.D. evaluator and practitioner of hip surgery.

Authors:  J J Callaghan
Journal:  Iowa Orthop J       Date:  1996

2.  Mechanical properties of bioactive glass (13-93) scaffolds fabricated by robotic deposition for structural bone repair.

Authors:  Xin Liu; Mohamed N Rahaman; Gregory E Hilmas; B Sonny Bal
Journal:  Acta Biomater       Date:  2013-02-21       Impact factor: 8.947

3.  Biomechanics, load analysis and sports injuries in the lower extremities.

Authors:  B M Nigg
Journal:  Sports Med       Date:  1985 Sep-Oct       Impact factor: 11.136

Review 4.  Why have we left Charnley low friction arthroplasty?

Authors:  D D Goetz; W H Harris
Journal:  Iowa Orthop J       Date:  1993

5.  Biomechanics important to interpret radiographs of the hip.

Authors:  D I Rosenthal; J A Scott
Journal:  Skeletal Radiol       Date:  1983       Impact factor: 2.199

6.  Basic science considerations in primary total hip replacement arthroplasty.

Authors:  Saqeb B Mirza; Douglas G Dunlop; Sukhmeet S Panesar; Syed G Naqvi; Shafat Gangoo; Saif Salih
Journal:  Open Orthop J       Date:  2010-05-11

7.  Biomechanical behaviour of a French femoral component with thin cement mantle: The 'French paradox' may not be a paradox after all.

Authors:  Y Numata; A Kaneuji; L Kerboull; E Takahashi; T Ichiseki; K Fukui; J Tsujioka; N Kawahara
Journal:  Bone Joint Res       Date:  2018-08-04       Impact factor: 5.853

8.  Alternative radiopacifiers for polymethyl methacrylate bone cements: Silane-treated anatase titanium dioxide and yttria-stabilised zirconium dioxide.

Authors:  Wayne Nishio Ayre; Nicole Scully; Carole Elford; Bronwen Aj Evans; Wendy Rowe; Jeff Rowlands; Ravi Mitha; Paul Malpas; Panagiota Manti; Cathy Holt; Rhidian Morgan-Jones; James C Birchall; Stephen P Denyer; Sam L Evans
Journal:  J Biomater Appl       Date:  2021-02-11       Impact factor: 2.646

9.  Stem subsidence of polished and rough double-taper stems: in vitro mechanical effects on the cement-bone interface.

Authors:  Ayumi Kaneuji; Kengo Yamada; Kenichi Hirosaki; Masahiro Takano; Tadami Matsumoto
Journal:  Acta Orthop       Date:  2009-06       Impact factor: 3.717

10.  The influence of cement thickness on stem subsidence and cement creep in a collarless polished tapered stem: When are thick cement mantles detrimental?

Authors:  E Takahashi; A Kaneuji; R Tsuda; Y Numata; T Ichiseki; K Fukui; N Kawahara
Journal:  Bone Joint Res       Date:  2017-05       Impact factor: 5.853

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.