Influence of the positioning of a cementless glenoid prosthesis on its interface micromotions

Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part H: Journal of Engineering in Medicine

Volumn 223, Issue 7, 2009, Pages 795-804

  Suarez D R ^a,b   Van Der Linden, J C ^b,c   Valstar, E R ^a,d   Broomans, P ^b   Poort, G ^b   Rozing, P M ^a   Van Keulen, F ^b  

^a LEIDEN UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER   (Netherlands)

^b DELFT UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY   (Netherlands)

^c ERASMUS MEDICAL CENTER   (Netherlands)

^d DELFT UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

Bone implant interface; Finite elements; Glenoid prosthesis; Micromotions

Indexed keywords

ARM MOVEMENTS; ARM POSITION; BONE IMPLANT INTERFACE; BONE QUALITY; CEMENTLESS; FINITE ELEMENTS; GLENOID COMPONENT; GLENOID PROSTHESIS; IMPLANTATION DEPTH; MALALIGNMENT; MICRO MOTION; MICROMOTIONS; MUSCLE FORCE; MUSCULOSKELETAL MODEL; NORMAL LOADING; RHEUMATOID ARTHRITIS; THREE DIMENSIONAL FINITE ELEMENT MODEL; TOTAL SHOULDER ARTHROPLASTY; UPPER ARM; BONE-IMPLANT INTERFACES;

ALIGNMENT; FINITE ELEMENT METHOD; PROSTHETICS; ARTHROPLASTY; BONE; DISEASES; NEURAL PROSTHESES;

BONE; LOADING;

ARTICLE; BIOLOGICAL MODEL; COMPUTER ASSISTED SURGERY; COMPUTER SIMULATION; FINITE ELEMENT ANALYSIS; HUMAN; IMPLANTATION; JOINT PROSTHESIS; METHODOLOGY; MOTION; PATHOPHYSIOLOGY; SHOULDER;

COMPUTER SIMULATION; FINITE ELEMENT ANALYSIS; HUMANS; JOINT PROSTHESIS; MODELS, BIOLOGICAL; MOTION; PROSTHESIS IMPLANTATION; SHOULDER JOINT; SURGERY, COMPUTER-ASSISTED;

EID: 70349441071     PISSN: 09544119     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1243/09544119JEIM545     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (32)

1. Bohsali, K. I., Wirth, M. A., and Rockwood Jr, C. A. Complications of total shoulder arthroplasty. J. Bone Jt Surg. Am., 2006, 88(10), 2279-2292.
2. Williams, G. R. and Abboud, J. A. Total shoulder arthroplasty: glenoid component design. J. Shoulder Elbow Surg., 2005, 14(1, Suppl.), S122-S128.
3. Torchia, M. E., Cofield, R. H., and Settergren, C. R. Total shoulder arthroplasty with the Neer prosthesis: long-term results. J. Shoulder Elbow Surg., 1997, 6(6), 495-505.
4. Cofield, R. H. Total shoulder arthroplasty with the Neer prosthesis. J. Bone Jt Surg. Am., 1984, 66(6), 899-906.
5. Norris, B. L. and Lachiewicz, P. F. Modern cement technique and the survivorship of total shoulder arthroplasty. Clin. Orthop. Related Res., 1996, 328, 76-85.
6. Wallace, A. L., Phillips, R. L., MacDougal, G. A., Walsh, W. R., and Sonnabend, D. H. Resurfacing of the glenoid in total shoulder arthroplasty. A comparison, at a mean of five years, of prostheses inserted with and without cement. J. Bone Jt Surg. Am., 1999, 81(4), 5180-5187.
7. Boileau, P., Avidor, C., Krishnan, S. G., Walch, G., Kempf, J. F., and Mole, D. Cemented polyethylene versus uncemented metal-backed glenoid components in total shoulder arthroplasty: a prospective, double-blind, randomized study. J. Shoulder Elbow Surg., 2002, 11, 351-359.
8. Gupta, S., van der Helm, F. C. T., and van Keulen, F. The possibilities of uncemented glenoid component - a finite element study. Clin. Biomechanics, 2004, 19(3), 292-302.
9. Cochran, D. L., Schenk, R. K., Lussi, A., Higginbottom, F. L., and Buser, D. Bone response to unloaded and loaded titanium implants with a sandblasted and acid-etched surface: a histometric study in the canine mandible. J. Biomed. Mater. Res., 1998, 40(1), 1-11.
10. Simmons, C. A., Valiquette, N., and Pilliar, R. M. Osseointegration of sintered porous-surfaced and plasma spray-coated implants: an animal model study of early postimplantation healing response and mechanical stability. J. Biomed. Mater. Res., 2003, 47(2), 127-138.
11. Simon, U., Augat, P., Ignatius, A., and Claes, L. Influence of the stiffness bone defect implants on the mechanical conditions at the interface - a finite element analysis with contact. J. Biomechanics, 2003, 36(8), 1079-1086.
12. Hasan, S. S., Leith, J. M., Campbell, B., Kapil, R., Smith, K. L., and Matsen III, F. A. Characteristics of unsatisfactory shoulder arthroplasties. J. Shoulder Elbow Surg., 2002, 11, 431-441.
13. Hopkins, A. R., Hansen, U. N., Amis, A. A., and Emery, R. The effects of glenoid component alignment variations on cement mantle stresses in total shoulder arthroplasty. J. Shoulder Elbow Surg., 2004, 13, 668-675.
14. Oosterom, R., Rozing, P. M., and Bersee, H. E. N. Effect of glenoid component inclinationon its fixation and humeral head subluxation in total shoulder arthroplasty. Clin.Biomechanics, 2004, 19, 1000-1008.
15. De Leest, O., Rozing, P. M., Rozendaal, L. A., and Van der Helm, F. C. T. Influence of glenohumeral prosthesis geometry and placement on shoulder muscle forces. Clin. Orthop. Related Res., 1996, 330(1), 222-233.
16. Kaptein, B. L. and van der Helm, F. C. T. Estimating muscle attachment contours by transforming geometrical bone models. J. Biomechanics, 2004, 37, 263-273.
17. Veeger, H. E. J., van der Helm, F. C. T., van der Woude, L. V. H., Pronk, G. M., and Rozendal, R. H. Inertia and muscle contraction parameters for musculoskeletal modelling of the shoulder mechanism. J. Biomechanics, 1991, 24, 615-629.
18. Rice, J. C., Cowin, S. C., and Bowman, J. A. On the dependence of the elasticity and strength of cancellous bone on apparent density. J. Biomechanics, 1988, 21(2), 155-168.
19. Schaffler, M. B. and Burr, D. B. Stiffness of compact bone: effects of porosity and density. J. Biomechanics, 1988, 21(1), 13-16.
20. Dalstra, M., Frich, L. H., and Sneppen, O. The loss of load-bearing capability in rheumatoid glenoids. In Proceedings of the Tenth Conference of the European Society of Biomechanics, 1996, p. 178 (Katholieke Universität Leuven, Leuven).
21. The GNU triangulated surface library, 2006, available from http://gts.sourceforge.net/.
22. Frey, J. P. and Borouchaki, H. Geometric surface mesh optimization. Computing Visualization Sci., 1998, 1, 113-121.
23. Taubin, G. A signal processing approach to fair surface design. In Proceedings of the 22nd Annual Conference on Computer Graphics and Interactive Techniques, 1995, pp. 351-358 (Association for Computing Machinery, New York).
24. Zhang, Y., Ahn, P. B., Fitzpatrick, D. C., Heiner, A. D., Poggie, R. A., and Brown, T. D. Interfacial frictional behavior: cancellous bone, cortical bone, and a novel porous tantalum biomaterial. J. Musculoskeletal Res., 1999, 3(4), 245-251.
25. Grant, J. A., Bishop, N. E., Gotzen, N., Sprecher, C., Honl, M., and Morlock, M. M. Artificial composite bone as a model of human trabecular bone: the implant bone interface. J. Biomechanics, 2007, 40(5), 1158-11154
26. Botha, C. P. Techniques and software architectures for medical visualisation and image processing. PhD Thesis, Delft University of Technology, Delft, The Netherlands, 2005.
27. Van der Helm, F. C. T. A finite element musculoskeletal model of the shoulder mechanism. J. Biomechanics, 1994, 27, 551-569.
28. Ramamurti, B. S., Orr, T. E., Bragdon, C. R., Lowenstein, J. D., Jasty, M., and Harris, W. H. Factors influencing stability at the interface between a porous surface and cancellous bone: a finite element analysis of a canine in vivo micromotion experiment. J. Biomed. Mater. Res., 1997, 36, 274-280.
29. Pilliar, R. M., Lee, J. M., and Maniatopoulos, C. Observations on the effect of movement on bone ingrowth into porous-surfaced implants. Clin. Orthop. Related Res., 1986, 208, 108-113.
30. Vandamme, K., Naert, I., Geris, L., Vander Sloten, J., Puers, R., and Duyck, J. The effect of micromotion on the tissue response around immediately loaded roughened titanium implants in the rabbit. Eur. J. Oral Sci., 2007, 115(1), 21-29.
31. Rosenberg, N., Neumann, L., Modi, A., Mersich, I. J., and Wallace, A. W. Improvements in survival of the uncemented Nottingham total shoulder prosthesis: a prospective comparative study. BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders, 2007, 8, 76.
32. Iannotti, J. P., Spencer, E. E., Winter, U., Deffenbaugh, D., and Williams, G. Prosthetic positioning in total shoulder arthroplasty. J. Shoulder Elbow Surg., 2005, 14(1, Suppl.), 111S-121S. (Pubitemid 40261274)