» Articles » PMID: 31208433

Comparison of Two Metaphyseal-fitting (short) Femoral Stems in Primary Total Hip Arthroplasty: Study Protocol for a Prospective Randomized Clinical Trial with Additional Biomechanical Testing and Finite Element Analysis

Overview
Journal Trials
Publisher Biomed Central
Date 2019 Jun 19
PMID 31208433
Citations 10
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Background: Total hip replacement has recently followed a progressive evolution towards principles of bone- and soft-tissue-sparing surgery. Regarding femoral implants, different stem designs have been developed as an alternative to conventional stems, and there is a renewed interest towards short versions of uncemented femoral implants. Based on both experimental testing and finite element modeling, the proposed study has been designed to compare the biomechanical properties and clinical performance of the newly introduced short-stem Minima S, for which clinical data are lacking with an older generation stem, the Trilock Bone Preservation Stem with an established performance record in short to midterm follow-up.

Methods/design: In the experimental study, the transmission of forces as measured by cortical surface-strain distribution in the proximal femur will be evaluated using digital image correlation (DIC), first on the non-implanted femur and then on the implanted stems. Finite element parametric models of the bone, the stem and their interface will be also developed. Finite element predictions of surface strains in implanted composite femurs, after being validated against biomechanical testing measurements, will be used to assist the comparison of the stems by deriving important data on the developed stress and strain fields, which cannot be measured through biomechanical testing. Finally, a prospective randomized comparative clinical study between these two stems will be also conducted to determine (1) their clinical performance up to 2 years' follow-up using clinical scores and gait analysis (2) stem fixation and remodeling using a detailed radiographic analysis and (3) incidence and types of complications.

Discussion: Our study would be the first that compares not only the clinical and radiological outcome but also the biomechanical properties of two differently designed femoral implants that are theoretically classified in the same main category of cervico-metaphyseal-diaphyseal short stems. We can hypothesize that even these subtle variations in geometric design between these two stems may create different loading characteristics and thus dissimilar biomechanical behaviors, which in turn could have an influence to their clinical performance.

Trial Registration: International Standard Randomized Controlled Trial Number, ID: ISRCTN10096716 . Retrospectively registered on May 8 2018.

Citing Articles

Increased stability of short femoral stem through customized distribution of coefficient of friction in porous coating.

Solou K, Solou A, Tatani I, Lakoumentas J, Tserpes K, Megas P Sci Rep. 2024; 14(1):12243.

PMID: 38806607 PMC: 11133419. DOI: 10.1038/s41598-024-63077-w.


Gene-Activated Materials in Regenerative Dentistry: Narrative Review of Technology and Study Results.

Krasilnikova O, Yakimova A, Ivanov S, Atiakshin D, Kostin A, Sosin D Int J Mol Sci. 2023; 24(22).

PMID: 38003439 PMC: 10671237. DOI: 10.3390/ijms242216250.


The compared study about femoral stem malalignment with or without the special curved rasp during DAA total hip arthroplasty.

Lin B, Lan Y, Lu Z, Xie S, Lin F, Weng Y BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2023; 24(1):319.

PMID: 37087443 PMC: 10122324. DOI: 10.1186/s12891-023-06409-7.


Influence of different fixation modes on biomechanical conduction of 3D printed prostheses for treating critical diaphyseal defects of lower limbs: A finite element study.

Liu B, Lv Y, Li X, Liu Z, Zheng Y, Wen P Front Surg. 2022; 9:959306.

PMID: 36090321 PMC: 9448880. DOI: 10.3389/fsurg.2022.959306.


Spatial Bridge Locking Fixator versus Traditional Locking Plates in Treating AO/OTA 32-A3.2 Fracture: Finite Element Analysis and Biomechanical Evaluation.

Hu J, Peng Y, Li J, Li M, Xiong Y, Xiao J Orthop Surg. 2022; 14(8):1638-1648.

PMID: 35733286 PMC: 9363740. DOI: 10.1111/os.13308.


References
1.
Morrey B, Adams R, Kessler M . A conservative femoral replacement for total hip arthroplasty. A prospective study. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2000; 82(7):952-8. DOI: 10.1302/0301-620x.82b7.10420. View

2.
Engh Jr C, McAuley J, Sychterz C, Sacco M, Engh Sr C . The accuracy and reproducibility of radiographic assessment of stress-shielding. A postmortem analysis. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2000; 82(10):1414-20. DOI: 10.2106/00004623-200010000-00007. View

3.
Kim Y, Kim J, Cho S . Strain distribution in the proximal human femur. An in vitro comparison in the intact femur and after insertion of reference and experimental femoral stems. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2001; 83(2):295-301. DOI: 10.1302/0301-620x.83b2.10108. View

4.
Gillies R, Morberg P, Bruce W, Turnbull A, Walsh W . The influence of design parameters on cortical strain distribution of a cementless titanium femoral stem. Med Eng Phys. 2002; 24(2):109-14. DOI: 10.1016/s1350-4533(01)00124-2. View

5.
Mahomed N, Liang M, Cook E, Daltroy L, Fortin P, Fossel A . The importance of patient expectations in predicting functional outcomes after total joint arthroplasty. J Rheumatol. 2002; 29(6):1273-9. View