The influence of resection height on proximal femoral strain patterns after Metha short stem hip arthroplasty: an experimental study on composite femora
- 457 Downloads
The number of candidates for a total hip arthroplasty (THA) is steadily increasing, while the average patient age is decreasing for primary THA. The rise in THA is mainly due to excellent clinical outcomes and the extended longevity of modern implants. Short stem arthroplasties with predominantly metaphyseal fixation such as the Metha® stem are suggested for young patients. It is hypothesised that the more physiological load transfer of these devices reduces stress shielding, which in turn may reduce the risk of aseptic loosening. However, patients with femoral deformities often require a deviation of the resection height. To this end, our aim was to evaluate how resection height influences strain patterns in order to characterise possible limits for short stem implantation.
Biomechanical testing using ten strain gauges on synthetic bone illustrated the strain patterns of three different resection heights (0, +5 and +10 mm) for the Metha stem.
The greatest differences in strains were displayed at the “high” (most proximal) resection height (+10 mm) when compared to the non-implanted strain pattern. At the medial calcar, the strain was 143 % for +10 mm, 96 % for +5 mm and 94 % for 0 mm. Overall, discrepancies were less for deeper resections.
The deeper the resection, the more similar the strain patterns are when compared to a non-implanted synthetic bone. Changes in strain patterns are induced by variation in the varus/valgus positioning of the implant and by different offsets.
KeywordsProximal Femur Strain Pattern Short Stem Gruen Zone Major Principal Strain
The study was kindly supported by the “Hochschulinterne Leistungsförderung (HiLF)” of the MHH and by Aesculap who provided the implants for the biomechanical testing.
Conflict of interest
Three of the authors (T. Floerkemeier, H. Windhagen and G. von Lewinski) are paid instructors for the company B. Braun Aesculap, Tuttlingen, Germany.
- 9.Floerkemeier T, Tscheuschner N, Calliess T, Ezechieli M, Floerkemeier S, Budde S, Windhagen H, von Lewinski G (2012) Cementless short stem hip arthroplasty METHA® as an encouraging option in adults with osteonecrosis of the femoral head. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 132(8):1125–1131PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 11.Gruen TA, McNeice GM, Amstutz HC (1979) “Modes of failure” of cemented stem-type femoral components: a radiographic analysis of loosening. Clin Orthop Relat Res 141:17–27Google Scholar
- 14.Hoffmann K (1989) An introduction of measurements using strain gauges. Hottinger Baldwin Messtechnik, DarmstadtGoogle Scholar
- 21.Rometsch E, Bos PK, Koes BW (2012) Survival of short hip stems with a “modern”, trochanter-sparing design—a systematic literature review. Hip Int 22:344–354. doi: 10.5301/HIP.2012.9472