Effects of Prosthesis Stem Materials on Stress Distribution of Total Hip Replacement

Abstract:

Bone loss and bone thickening phenomenon occurred due to different stiffness of the implant and femur. Implant with stiffer materials than the bone carries majority of the load and it transferred down along the implant till the distal tip of the stem. Both phenomenons contribute to stress shielding and loosening of the prosthesis stem. In this study, the stress distributions in intact femur and THR femur are established using finite element method. The THR femur model consists of cemented hip Ti6Al4V and CoCrMo prosthesis stem implanted inside the femur bone. Effects of different material properties of the prosthesis stem on the resulting stress distributions are investigated. Results shows that the largest discrepancy in stress values between intact and THR femur is predicted along the middle region at both lateral and medial planes. The distal region shows that the calculated stress for both THR femur experienced higher stress magnitude than that of intact femur. The higher stress in THR femur leads to bone thickening at the particular region. The corresponding stress magnitude saturates at 25 MPa for THR femur while intact femur is slightly lower at 22 MPa.

• Periodical: Advanced Materials Research (Volumes 129-131)
• Pages: 343-347
• DOI: https://doi.org/10.4028/www.scientific.net/AMR.129-131.343
• Online since: August 2010
• Authors: Abdul Halim Abdullah, Alias Mohd Saman, Mohd Asri Mohd Nor, Ishkrizat Taib, Giha Tardan
• Keywords: Biomechanics, Finite Element Model (FEM), Prosthesis Stem Material, Stress Analysis, Total Hip Replacement

References

[1] O.N. Furnes: Hip and Knee Replacement in Norway 1987-2000, The Norwegian Arthroplasty Register, Department of Orthopaedics, Haukeland University Hospital, Norway (2002).

[2] P.B. Chang, B.J. Williams, S.B. Kanwaljeet, T. Belknap, T. Santner, W.I. Notz and D.L. Bartel: Design and analysis of robust total joint replacements: Finite element model experiments with environmental variables, Journal of Biomechanical Engineering Vol. 123 (2001).

DOI: 10.1115/1.1372701

[3] D.H. Sochart and M.L. Porter: Long-term results of cemented Charnley low-friction arthroplasty in patients aged less than 30 years, Journal of Arthroplasty Vol. 13, No. 2, (1998).

DOI: 10.1016/s0883-5403(98)90089-4

[4] A.H. Abdullah, M.N. Mohd Asri, M.S. Alias and T. Giha: Finite Element Analysis of Cemented Hip Arthroplasty: Influence of Stem Tapers, Proc. Int. MultiConference of Engineers and Computer Scientists (IMECS 2010).

[5] N.A. Ramaniraka, L.R. Rakotomanana, and P.F. Leyvraz: The Fixation of The Cemented Femoral Component: Effects of Stem Stiffness, Cement Thickness and Roughness of the Cement-Bone Surface, The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery Vol. 82-b No. 2 (2000).

DOI: 10.1302/0301-620x.82b2.0820297

[6] P. Knauss: Material Properties and Strength Behavior of The Compact Bone Tissue at The Coxal Human-Femur, Biomedical Techniques Vol. 26 (1981).

[7] P. Kowlczyk: Design optimization of cementless femoral hip prostheses using finite element analysis, Journal of Biomechanical Engineering Vol. 123 (2001), pp.396-402.

DOI: 10.1115/1.1392311

[8] M.O. Heller, G. Bergmann, J.P. Kassi, L. Claes, N.P. Haas and G.N. Duda: Determination of Muscle Loading at The Hip Joint for Use in Pre-Clinical Testing, Journal of Biomechanics Vol. 38 (2005).

DOI: 10.1016/j.jbiomech.2004.05.022

[9] B. Mahaisavariya, K. Sitthiseripratip, and J. Suwanprateeb: Finite Element Study of the Proximal Femur with Retained Trochanteric Gamma Nail and After Removal of Nail, Int. Journal of Care Injured Vol. 37 (2006).

DOI: 10.1016/j.injury.2006.01.019