» Articles » PMID: 25957612

All-polyethylene Tibial Components Generate Higher Stress and Micromotions Than Metal-backed Tibial Components in Total Knee Arthroplasty

Overview
Publisher Wiley
Date 2015 May 11
PMID 25957612
Citations 17
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Purpose: Most total knee arthroplasty tibial components are metal-backed, but an alternative tibial component made entirely of polyethylene (all-polyethylene design) exists. While several clinical studies have shown that all-poly design performs similarly to the metal-backed, the objective of this study is to perform a biomechanical comparison.

Methods: Loads, constraints and geometries during a squat activity at 120° of flexion were obtained from a validated musculoskeletal model and applied to a finite element model. Stresses in the tibia and micromotions at the bone-implant interface were evaluated for several implant configurations: (1) three different thicknesses of the cement penetration under the baseplate (2, 3 and 4 mm), (2) the presence or absence of a cement layer around the stem of the tibial tray and (3) three different bone conditions (physiological, osteopenic and osteoporotic bone).

Results: All-polyethylene tibial components resulted in significantly higher (p < 0.001) and more uneven stress distributions in the cancellous bone under the baseplate (peak difference: +128.4 %) and fivefold increased micromotions (p < 0.001). Performance of both implant designs worsened with poorer bone quality with peaks in stress and micromotion variations of +40.8 and +54.0 %, respectively (p < 0.001). Performance improvements when the stem was cemented were not statistically significant (n.s.).

Conclusion: The metal-backed design showed better biomechanical performance during a squat activity at 120° of flexion compared to the all-polyethylene design. These results should be considered when selecting the appropriate tibial component for a patient, especially in the presence of osteoporotic bone or if intense physical activity is foreseen.

Citing Articles

Biomechanical analysis of different techniques for residual bone defect from tibial plateau bone cyst in total knee arthroplasty.

Liu D, Miao Z, Zhang W, Liu C, Du L, Zhu Y Front Bioeng Biotechnol. 2024; 12:1498882.

PMID: 39539692 PMC: 11557455. DOI: 10.3389/fbioe.2024.1498882.


Effect of design and surgical parameters variations in mobile-bearing versus fixed-bearing unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: A finite element analysis.

Luyckx T, Bori E, Saldari R, Fiore S, Altamore V, Innocenti B J Exp Orthop. 2024; 11(4):e70053.

PMID: 39463465 PMC: 11512207. DOI: 10.1002/jeo2.70053.


Biomechanical analysis of patient specific cone vs conventional stem in revision total knee arthroplasty.

Piovan G, Bori E, Padalino M, Pianigiani S, Innocenti B J Orthop Surg Res. 2024; 19(1):439.

PMID: 39068461 PMC: 11282788. DOI: 10.1186/s13018-024-04936-0.


Biomechanical comparison of all-polyethylene total knee replacement and its metal-backed equivalent on periprosthetic tibia using the finite element method.

Apostolopoulos V, Bohac P, Marcian P, Nachtnebl L, Mahdal M, Pazourek L J Orthop Surg Res. 2024; 19(1):153.

PMID: 38396020 PMC: 10893603. DOI: 10.1186/s13018-024-04631-0.


Application strategy of finite element analysis in artificial knee arthroplasty.

Zhang Z, Qi Y, Wei B, Bao H, Xu Y Front Bioeng Biotechnol. 2023; 11:1127289.

PMID: 37265991 PMC: 10230366. DOI: 10.3389/fbioe.2023.1127289.


References
1.
Janssen D, Mann K, 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(15):3158-63. PMC: 2613656. DOI: 10.1016/j.jbiomech.2008.08.020. View

2.
Taylor M, Tanner K, Freeman M . Finite element analysis of the implanted proximal tibia: a relationship between the initial cancellous bone stresses and implant migration. J Biomech. 1998; 31(4):303-10. DOI: 10.1016/s0021-9290(98)00022-0. View

3.
Pianigiani S, Chevalier Y, Labey L, Pascale V, Innocenti B . Tibio-femoral kinematics in different total knee arthroplasty designs during a loaded squat: a numerical sensitivity study. J Biomech. 2012; 45(13):2315-23. DOI: 10.1016/j.jbiomech.2012.06.014. View

4.
Lewis J, Askew M, Jaycox D . A comparative evaluation of tibial component designs of total knee prostheses. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1982; 64(1):129-35. View

5.
Victor J, Labey L, Wong P, Innocenti B, Bellemans J . The influence of muscle load on tibiofemoral knee kinematics. J Orthop Res. 2009; 28(4):419-28. DOI: 10.1002/jor.21019. View