The mechanical effects of different levels of cement penetration at the cement-bone interface

Journal of Biomechanics

Volumn 43, Issue 6, 2010, Pages 1167-1175

  Waanders, Daan ^a   Janssen, Dennis ^a   Mann, Kenneth A ^b   Verdonschot, Nico ^a,c  

^a RADBOUD UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER   (Netherlands)

^b State University of New York Upstate Medical University: College of Medicine   (United States)

^c UNIVERSITY OF TWENTE   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

Bone; Bone cement; Finite element; Interface; Mechanics

Indexed keywords

BONE CONSTRUCTS; CEMENT PENETRATION; CONTACT AREAS; CRACK FORMATION; EXPERIMENTAL DATA; FEA MODELS; FINITE ELEMENT; FINITE ELEMENT ANALYSIS; INTERDIGITATIONS; INTERFACE; INTERFACE MECHANICS; INTERFACE STRENGTH; INTERFACIAL STRENGTH; MECHANICAL EFFECTS; MICROCOMPUTED TOMOGRAPHY;

BONE; CEMENTS; COMPUTERIZED TOMOGRAPHY; CRACKS; FINITE ELEMENT METHOD; MECHANICS;

BONE CEMENT;

BONE CEMENT;

ARTICLE; CONTACT STRESS; CONTROLLED STUDY; CRUSHING STRENGTH; EXPERIMENTAL MODEL; FINITE ELEMENT ANALYSIS; FRICTION; INTERFACE PRESSURE; LOAD CARRYING CAPACITY; MATERIALS TESTING; MECHANICAL STRESS; MICRO-COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROCESS OPTIMIZATION; SHEAR STRENGTH; TENSILE STRENGTH; VALIDATION PROCESS;

ALGORITHMS; BIOMECHANICS; BONE CEMENTS; COMPUTER SIMULATION; EQUIPMENT FAILURE ANALYSIS; FINITE ELEMENT ANALYSIS; HIP PROSTHESIS; HUMANS; MATERIALS TESTING; MODELS, BIOLOGICAL; OSSEOINTEGRATION; PROSTHESIS FAILURE; SHEAR STRENGTH; TENSILE STRENGTH; X-RAY MICROTOMOGRAPHY;

EID: 77950689590     PISSN: 00219290     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.jbiomech.2009.11.033     Document Type: Article

References (37)

1. Askew M.J., Steege J.W., Lewis J.L., Ranieri J.R., Wixson R.L. Effect of cement pressure and bone strength on polymethylmethacrylate fixation. J. Orthop. Res. 1984, 1:412-420.
2. Bean D.J., Convery F.R., Woo S.L., Lieber R.L. Regional variation in shear strength of the bone-polymethylmethacrylate interface. J. Arthroplasty 1987, 2:293-298.
3. Berry D.J. Cemented femoral stems: what matters most. J. Arthroplasty 2004, 19:83-84.
4. Bugbee W.D., Barrera D.L., Lee A.C., Convery F.R. Variations in shear strength of the bone-cement interface in the proximal femur. Trans. Orthop. Res. Soc. 1992, 17:22.
5. Freeman M.A., Bradley G.W., Revell P.A. Observations upon the interface between bone and polymethylmethacrylate cement. J. Bone Joint Surg. Br. 1982, 64:489-493.
6. Goto, K., Kawanabe, K., Kowalski, R., Baker, D., Nakamura, T., (2009). Bonding ability evaluation of bone cement on the cortical surface of rabbit's tibia. J. Mater. Sci. Mater. Med.. in press.
7. Gozzard C., Gheduzzi S., Miles A.W., Learmonth I.D. An in-vitro investigation into the cement pressurization achieved during insertion of four different femoral stems. Proc. Inst. Mech. Eng. [H.] 2005, 219:407-413.
8. Graham J., Ries M., Pruitt L. Effect of bone porosity on the mechanical integrity of the bone-cement interface. J. Bone Joint Surg. Am. 2003, 85-A:1901-1908.
9. Harper E.J., Bonfield W. Tensile characteristics of ten commercial acrylic bone cements. J. Biomed. Mater. Res. 2000, 53:605-616.
10. Janssen D., Mann K.A., Verdonschot N. Micro-mechanical modeling of the cement-bone interface: the effect of friction, morphology and material properties on the micromechanical response. J. Biomech. 2008, 41:3158-3163.
11. Janssen D., Mann K.A., Verdonschot N. Finite element simulation of cement-bone interface micromechanics: a comparison to experimental results. J. Orthop. Res. 2009, 27:1312-1318.
12. Keyak J.H., Kaneko T.S., Tehranzadeh J., Skinner H.B. Predicting proximal femoral strength using structural engineering models. Clin. Orthop. Relat. Res 2005, 437:219-228.
13. Krause W.R., Krug W., Miller J. Strength of the cement-bone interface. Clin. Orthop. Relat. Res. 1982, 163:290-299.
14. Lewis G. Properties of acrylic bone cement: state of the art review. J. Biomed. Mater. Res. 1997, 38:155-182.
15. Lotz J.C., Gerhart T.N., Hayes W.C. Mechanical properties of metaphyseal bone in the proximal femur. J. Biomech. 1991, 24:317-329.
16. Lucksanasombool P., Higgs W.A., Ignat M., Higgs R.J., Swain M.V. Comparison of failure characteristics of a range of cancellous bone-bone cement composites. J. Biomed. Mater. Res. A 2003, 64:93-104.
17. MacDonald W., Swarts E., Beaver R. Penetration and shear strength of cement-bone interfaces in vivo. Clin. Orthop. Relat. Res. 1993, 286:283-288.
18. Majkowski R.S., Bannister G.C., Miles A.W. The effect of bleeding on the cement-bone interface. An experimental study. Clin. Orthop. Relat. Res. 1994, 299:293-297.
19. Majkowski R.S., Miles A.W., Bannister G.C., Perkins J., Taylor G.J. Bone surface preparation in cemented joint replacement. J. Bone Joint Surg. Br. 1993, 75:459-463.
20. Mann K.A., Allen M.J., Ayers D.C. Pre-yield and post-yield shear behavior of the cement-bone interface. J. Orthop. Res. 1998, 16:370-378.
21. Mann K.A., Ayers D.C., Werner F.W., Nicoletta R.J., Fortino M.D. Tensile strength of the cement-bone interface depends on the amount of bone interdigitated with PMMA cement. J. Biomech. 1997, 30:339-346.
22. Mann K.A., Miller M.A., Cleary R.J., Janssen D., Verdonschot N. Experimental micromechanics of the cement-bone interface. J. Orthop. Res. 2008, 26:872-879.
23. Mann K.A., Miller M.A., Race A., Verdonschot N. Shear fatigue micromechanics of the cement-bone interface: an in vitro study using digital image correlation techniques. J. Orthop. Res. 2009, 27:340-346.
24. Mann K.A., Werner F.W., Ayers D.C. Mechanical strength of the cement-bone interface is greater in shear than in tension. J. Biomech. 1999, 32:1251-1254.
25. Miller, M.A., Eberhardt, A.W., Cleary, R.J., Verdonschot, N., Mann, K.A., (2009). Micro-mechanics of post-mortem retrieved cement-bone interface. J. Orthop. Res. in press.
26. Miller M.A., Race A., Gupta S., Higham P., Clarke M.T., Mann K.A. The role of cement viscosity on cement-bone apposition and strength: an in vitro model with medullary bleeding. J. Arthroplasty 2007, 22:109-116.
27. Oates K.M., Barrera D.L., Tucker W.N., Chau C.C., Bugbee W.D., Convery F.R. In vivo effect of pressurization of polymethyl methacrylate bone-cement. Biomechanical and histologic analysis. J. Arthroplasty 1995, 10:373-381.
28. Perez M.A., Garcia-Aznar J.M., Doblare M., Seral B., Seral F. A comparative FEA of the debonding process in different concepts of cemented hip implants. Med. Eng. Phys. 2006, 28:525-533.
29. Pitto R.P., Koessler M., Kuehle J.W. Comparison of fixation of the femoral component without cement and fixation with use of a bone-vacuum cementing technique for the prevention of fat embolism during total hip arthroplasty. A prospective, randomized clinical trial. J. Bone Joint Surg. Am. 1999, 81:831-843.
30. Race A., Miller M.A., Clarke M.T., Mann K.A. 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, 76:679-687.
31. Race A., Miller M.A., Clarke M.T., Mann K.A., Higham P.A. The effect of low-viscosity cement on mantle morphology and femoral stem micromotion: a cadaver model with simulated blood flow. Acta Orthop. 2006, 77:607-616.
32. Sierra R.J., Timperley J.A., Gie G.A. Contemporary cementing technique and mortality during and after exeter total hip arthroplasty. J. Arthroplasty 2009, 24:325-332.
33. Skripitz R., Aspenberg P. Attachment of PMMA cement to bone: force measurements in rats. Biomaterials 1999, 20:351-356.
34. Stolk J., Verdonschot N., Murphy B.P., Prendergast P.J., Huiskes R. Finite element simulation of anisotropic damage accumulation and creep in acrylic bone cement. Eng. Fract. Mech. 2004, 71:513-528.
35. Stone J.J., Rand J.A., Chiu E.K., Grabowski J.J., An K.N. Cement viscosity affects the bone-cement interface in total hip arthroplasty. J. Orthop. Res. 1996, 14:834-837.
36. Waanders, D., Janssen, D., Miller, M.A., Mann, K.A., Verdonschot, N., (2009). Fatigue creep damage at the cement-bone interface: an experimental and a micro-mechanical finite element study. J. Biomech. 42, 2513-2519.
37. Wang J.S., Franzen H., Lidgren L. Interface gap after implantation of a cemented femoral stem in pigs. Acta. Orthop. Scand. 1999, 70:234-239.