Quantification of stem-cement interfacial gaps: In vitro CT analysis of Charnley-Kerboul and Lubinus SPII femoral hip implants

Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery - Series B

Volumn 90, Issue 1, 2008, Pages 107-113

  Scheerlinck, T ^a   Vandenbussche, P ^a   Noble, P C ^a,b  

^a UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL BRUSSELS   (Belgium)

^b BAYLOR COLLEGE OF MEDICINE   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

CEMENT;

ARTICLE; COMPUTER ASSISTED TOMOGRAPHY; HIP PROSTHESIS; HUMAN; IMPLANTATION; IN VITRO STUDY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROSTHESIS FAILURE; PROSTHESIS FIXATION;

ARTHROPLASTY, REPLACEMENT, HIP; BONE CEMENTS; CADAVER; CEMENTATION; FEMUR; HIP PROSTHESIS; HUMANS; PROSTHESIS DESIGN; PROSTHESIS FAILURE; SURFACE PROPERTIES; TOMOGRAPHY, X-RAY COMPUTED;

EID: 38749097433     PISSN: 0301620X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1302/0301-620X.90B1.19430     Document Type: Article

References (40)

1. Jasty M, Maloney WJ, Bragdon CR, et al. The initiation of failure in cemented femoral components of hip arthroplasties. J Bone Joint Surg [Br] 1991;73-B:551-8.
2. Race A, Miller MA, Clarke MT, Mann KA. Cement-implant interface gaps explain the poor results of CMW3 for femoral stem fixation: a cadaver study of migration, fatigue and mantle morphology. Acta Orthop 2005;76:679-87.
3. Race A, Miller MA, Ayres DC, Clearly RJ, Mann KA. The influence of surface roughness on stem-cement gaps. J Bone Joint Surg [B] 2002;84-B:1199-204.
4. Iesaka K, Jaffe WL, Kummer FJ. Effects of preheating of hip prostheses on the stem-cement interface. J Bone Joint Surg [Am] 2003;85-A:421-7.
5. Wang JS, Taylor M, Flivik G, Lidgren L. Factors affecting the static shear strength of the prosthetic stem-bone cement interface. J Mater Sci: Mater Med 2003;14:55-61.
6. Mann KA, Damron LA, Miller MA, et al. Stem-cement porosity may explain early loosening of cemented femoral hip components: experimental- computational in vitro study. J Orthop Res 2007;25:340-50.
7. Wang JS, Franzen H, Lindgren L. Interface gap after implantation of a cemented femoral stem in pigs. Acta Orthop Scand 1999;70:234-9.
8. James SP, Schmalzried TP, McGarry FJ, Harris WH. Extensive porosity at the cement-femoral prosthesis interface: a preliminary study. J Biomed Mater Res 1993;27:71-8.
9. Baleani M, Fognani R, Toni A. The influence of stem insertion rate on the porosity of the cement mantle of hip joint replacements. Proc Inst Mech Eng [H] 2003;217:199-205.
10. Spiegelberg SH, McKinley GH. A source of interfacial pore formation in cemented femoral components. Trans ORS 1999;24:253.
11. Mann KA, Damron LA, Race A, Ayers DC. Early cementing does not increase debond energy of grit blasted interfaces. J Orthop Res 2004;22:822-7.
12. Zhang Y, Putnam AW, Heiner AD, Callaghan JJ, Brown TD. Reliability of detecting prosthesis/cement interface radiolucencies in total hip arthroplasty. J Orthop Res 2002;20:683-7.
13. Geiger MH, Keating MA, Ritter MA, et al. The clinical significance of vacuum mixing bone cement. Clin Orthop 2001;382:258-66.
14. Iesaka K, Kummer FJ, Jaffe WL, Jones CM. The effects of fluid penetration and interfacial porosity on the fixation of cemented femoral components. J Bone Joint Surg [Br] 2005;87-B:1298-302.
15. Iesaka K, Jaffe WL, Kummer FJ. Effects of the initial temperature of acrylic bone cement liquid monomer on the properties of the stem-cement interface and cement polymerization. J Biomed Mater Res Part B Appl Biomater 2004;68:186-90.
16. Wixson RL, Lautenschlager EP, Novak MA. Vacuum mixing of acrylic bone cement. J Arthroplasty 1987;2:141-9.
17. Debrunner HU. The porosity of bone cement. Arch Orthop Unfallchir 1976;86:261-78 (in German).
18. Jafri AA, Green SM, Partington PF, McCaskie AW, Muller SD. Pre-heating of components in cemented total hip arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg [B] 2004;86-B:1214-19.
19. Bishop NE, Ferguson S, Tepic S. Porosity reduction in bone cement at the cement-stem interface. J Bone Joint Surg [Br] 1996;78-B:349-56.
20. Gilbert JL, Hasenwinkel JM, Wixson RL, Lautenschlager EP. A theoretical and experimental analysis of polymerization shrinkage of bone cement: a potential major source of porosity. J Biomed Mater Res 2000;52:210-18.
21. 21. Hsieh P-H, Tai C-L, Chang Y-H, Shih H-N, Sgih C-H. Precooling of the femoral canal enhances shear strength at the cement-prosthesis interface and reduces the polymerization temperature. J Orthop Res 2006;24:1809-14.
22. Li C, Schmid S, Mason J. Effects of pre-cooling and pre-heating procedures on cement polymerization and thermal osteonecrosis in cemented hip replacements. Med Eng Phys 2003;25:559-64.
23. Damron LA, Kim DG, Mann KA. Fatigue debonding of the roughened stem-cement interface: effects of surface roughness and stem heating conditions. J Biomed Mater Res Part B Appl Biomater 2006;78:181-8.
24. Scheerlinck T, de Mey J, Deklerck R, Noble PhC. CT analysis of defects of the cement mantle and alignment of the stem: in vitro comparison of Charnley-Kerboul femoral hip implants inserted line-to-line and undersized in paired femora. J Bone Joint Surg [Br] 2006;88-B:19-25.
25. Scheerlinck T, de Mey J, Deklerck R. CT-scan based analysis of the stem-cementbone composite: comparison of Lubinus SPII hip arthroplasties cemented line-to-line and undersized in a paired cadaver model (abstract). Hip Internat 2006;16:126.
26. Scheerlinck T, Casteleyn P-P. The design features of cemented femoral hip implants. J Bone Joint Surg [Br] 2006;88-B:1409-18.
27. Langlais F, Kerboull M, Sedel L, Ling RSM. The 'French Paradox'. J Bone Joint Surg [Br] 2003;85-B:17-20.
28. Crowninshield RD, Jennings JD, Laurent ML, Maloney WJ. Cemented femoral component surface finish mechanics. Clin Orthop 1998;355:90-102.
29. Howell JR Jr, Blunt LA, Doyle C, et al. In vivo surface wear mechanisms of femoral components of cemented total hip arthroplasties: the influence of wear mechanism on clinical outcome. J Arthroplasty 2004;19:88-101.
30. Scheerlinck T, Druyts P, Casteleyn P-P. The use of primary total hip arthroplasties in university hospitals of the European Union. Acta Orthop Belg 2004;70:231-9.
31. Malchau H, Herberts P, Garellick G, Söderman P, Eisler T. Prognosis of total hip replacement: update of results and risk-ratio: analysis for revision and re-revision from the Swedish national hip arthroplasty register 1979-2000. Procs 69th AAOS, 2002.
32. Savilahti S, Myllyneva I, Pajamaki KJ, Lindholm TS. Survival of Lubinus straight (IP) and curved (SP) total hip prostheses in 543 patients after 4-13 years. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 1997;116:10-13.
33. Scheerlinck T, de Mey J, Deklerck R. In vitro analysis of the cement mantle of femoral hip implants: development and validation of a CT-scan based measurement tool. J Orthop Res 2005;23:698-704.
34. Canabal F III, Katz B. Computational fluid dynamics simulation of PMMA cement flow upon insertion of a femoral stem into a bone cavity during a total hip prosthesis procedure. Am Soc Mech Eng 1994;28:165-6.
35. Noble PhC, Collier MS, Maltry JA, Kamaric E, Tullos HS. Pressurization and centralization enhance the quality and reproducibility of cement mantles. Clin Orthop 1998;355:77-89.
36. Raab S, Ahmed AM, Provan JW. The quasistatic and fatigue performance of the implant/bone-cement interface. J Biomed Mater Res 1981;15:159-82.
37. Muller SD, McCaskie AW. Dynamic void behavior in polymerizing polymethylmethacrylate cement. J Arthroplasty 2006;21:279-83.
38. Davies J, Kawate K, Harris WH. Effect of interfacial porosity on the torsional strength of the cement-metal interface. Trans ORS 1995;20:713.
39. James SP, Karydas D, McGarry FJ, Harris WH. Reduction of the extensive porosity in the cement at the femoral component/bone cement interface (abstract). Trans ORS 1993;18:520.
40. James SP, Schmalzried TP, McGarry FJ, Harris WH. Porosity reduction at the femoral prosthesis/cement interface (abstract). Procs 17th Society for Biomaterials 1991;14:50.