Multi-patient finite element simulation of keeled versus pegged glenoid implant designs in shoulder arthroplasty
This study investigates the mechanical behaviour of keeled and pegged implant designs used in shoulder arthroplasty for the first time using multiple 3D models. Thus, this study should provide valuable insights into the preferable use of either of these two controversial implant designs. Three-dimensional models of a scapula were derived from the CT scans of five patients, and an inter-patient-specific finite element analysis with special attention to bone density and boundary conditions was carried out. A distinct decrease in the investigated parameters was evident with the pegged implant in all of the patients, specifically for the implant and the bone cement. The relevance of the stress reduction within the bone is minor, whereas the reduction in the stress of the bone cement contributes to an increase in the bone cement survival. The particular construction of the pegged implant provides better stability and therefore supports bone ingrowth. The large variations between the patients show the necessity of patient-specific simulations and the use of multiple models to derive valuable results. In the conducted inter-patient-specific FEA, the pegged glenoid implants were found to exhibit superior behaviour compared with keeled implants. The results confirm the general clinical findings and demonstrate the FEA as a valuable tool in prosthetic and orthopaedic problems.
KeywordsGlenoid implant 3D modelling Finite element analysis Boundary conditions Micromotions
This project is supported by the Austrian FWF Translational Research Program L526-B05 and the PMU-FFF Rise Project R-09/03/003-SCH. The study was approved by the Ethics Committee of Salzburg, No. 415-E803/3-2007.
- 4.ASTM F451 (2008) Standard specification for acrylic bone cement. ASTM International, West ConshohockenGoogle Scholar
- 13.Favre P, Sheikh R, Fucentese SF, Jacob HAC (2005) An algorithm for estimation of shoulder muscle forces for clinical use. Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon) 20(8):822–833Google Scholar
- 19.Gupta S, Prosenjit D (2004) Bone geometry and mechanical properties of the human scapula using computed tomography data. Trends Biomater Artif Organs 17(2):61–70Google Scholar
- 21.Kalouche I, Crépin J, Abdelmoumen S, Mitton D, Guillot G, Gagey O (2010) Mechanical properties of glenoid cancellous bone. Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon) 25(4):292–298Google Scholar
- 26.Lazarus MD, Jensen KL, Southworth C, Matsen FA (2002) The radiographic evaluation of keeled and pegged glenoid component. J Bone Joint Surg Am 84A(7):1174–1182Google Scholar
- 29.Neer CS (1955) Articular replacement for the humeral head. J Bone Joint Surg Am 37-A(2):215–228Google Scholar
- 35.Terrier A, Büchler P, Farron A (2005) Bone-cement interface of the glenoid component: stress analysis for varying cement thickness. Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon) 20(7):710–717Google Scholar
- 40.Viceconti M, Olsen S, Nolte LP, Burton K (2005) Extracting clinically relevant data from finite element simulations. Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon) 20(5):451–454Google Scholar