Advertisement

Journal of Bionic Engineering

, Volume 15, Issue 1, pp 154–159 | Cite as

Application of acetabular reinforcement ring with hook for correction of segmental acetabular rim defects during total hip arthroplasty revision

  • Jianlin Xiao
  • Xin Zhao
  • Yiming Wang
  • Yuhui Yang
  • Jianhui Zhao
  • Zhongli Gao
  • Jianlin Zuo
Article

Abstract

This study investigated the biomechanical micro-motion associated with the application of acetabular reinforcement ring with hook (Ganz ring) for the correction of segmental acetabular rim defects, by finite element analysis. The objective was to determine whether the Ganz ring is suitable for correcting segmental acetabular rim defects at different regions during total hip arthroplasty revision as well as the number of screws required to fix the Ganz ring. A finite element model of the hip joint was generated to simulate and evaluate the insertion and fixation of the Ganz ring and acetabular cup in the context of segmental rim defects in the anterior column, superior portion, and posterior column. Micro-motion was the greatest in the posterior column defect and the least in the anterior column defect. However, the peak stress distribution on the remaining portion of the acetabular rim was the highest in the superior portion defect, following the posterior column defect and anterior column defect. Increasing the number of fixations of the Ganz ring did not decrease the micro-motion. We found that the Ganz ring effectively provided biomechanical stability during the reconstruction of the segmental rim defect as long as the screws fixed the Ganz ring well to the host bone.

Keywords

segmental acetabular rim defect Ganz ring biomechanics finite element method total hip arthroplasty revision 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Notes

Acknowledgment

This work was supported and funded by the National Nature Science Foundation of Youth in China (No. 81601907), The Outstanding Youth Foundation (20170520019JH) from the Science and Technology Department of Jilin Province.

References

  1. [1]
    Hayashi S, Hashimoto S, Takayama K, Matsumoto T, Nishida K, Kuroda R. Multiple revision surgeries and acetabular bone defect size may predict daily activity after revision total hip arthroplasty. The Journal of Arthroplasty, 2017, 32, 1606–1611.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. [2]
    Craiovan B S, Grifka J, Keshmiri A, Moser B, Wörner M, Renkawitz T. Bone defect adjusted strategy in revision arthroplasty of the hip: Wich implant in wich situation? Innovations and approved methods. Orthopade, 2015, 44, 366–374.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. [3]
    Numair J, Joshi A B, Murphy J C, Porter M L, Hardinge K. Total hip arthroplasty for congenital dysplasia or dislocation of the hip. Survivorship analysis and long-term results. Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery, 1997, 79, 1352–1360.Google Scholar
  4. [4]
    Brown N M, Morrison J, Sporer S M, Paprosky W G. The use of structural distal femoral allograft for acetabular reconstruction of paprosky type IIIA defects at a mean 21 years of follow-up. The Journal of Arthroplasty, 2016, 31, 680–683.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. [5]
    Wegrzyn J, Pibarot V, Jacquel A, Carret J P, Béjui-Hugues J, Guyen O. Acetabular reconstruction using a Kerboull cross-plate, structural allograft and cemented dual-mobility cup in revision THA at a minimum 5-year follow-up. The Journal of Arthroplasty, 2014, 29, 432–437.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. [6]
    Abolghasemian M, Sadeghi Naini M, Tangsataporn S, Lee P, Backstein D, Safir O, Kuzyk P, Gross A E. Reconstruction of massive uncontained acetabular defects using allograft with cage or ring reinforcement: An assessment of the graft’s ability to restore bone stock and its impact on the outcome of re-revision. Bone Joint Journal, 2014, 96, 319–324.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. [7]
    Oe K, Iida H, Kawamura H, Ueda N, Nakamura T, Okamoto N, Ueda Y. Long-term results of acetabular reconstruction using three bulk bone graft techniques in cemented total hip arthroplasty for developmental dysplasia. International Orthopaedics, 2016, 40, 1949–1954.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. [8]
    Iwase T, Ito T, Morita D. Massive bone defect compromises postoperative cup survivorship of acetabular revision hip arthroplasty with impaction bone grafting. The Journal of Arthroplasty, 2014, 29, 2424–2429.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. [9]
    Uchiyama K, Takahira N, Fukushima K, Yamamoto T, Moriya M, Itoman M. Radiological evaluation of allograft reconstruction in acetabulum with Ganz reinforcement ring in revision total hip replacement. Journal of Orthopaedic Science, 2010, 15, 764–771.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. [10]
    Beckmann N A, Weiss S, Klotz M C, Gondan M, Jaeger S, Bitsch R G. Loosening after acetabular revision: Comparison of trabecular metal and reinforcement rings. A systematic review. The Journal of Arthroplasty, 2014, 29, 229–235.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. [11]
    Gill T J, Siebenrock K, Oberholzer R, Ganz R. Acetabular reconstruction in developmental dysplasia of the hip: Results of the acetabular reinforcement ring with hook. The Journal of Arthroplasty, 1999, 14, 131–137.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. [12]
    Siebenrock K A, Tannast M, Kim S, Morgenstern W, Ganz R. Acetabular reconstruction using a roof reinforcement ring with hook for total hip arthroplasty in developmental dysplasia of the hip-osteoarthritis: Minimum 10-year follow-up results. The Journal of Arthroplasty, 2005, 20, 492–498.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. [13]
    Gerber A, Pisan M, Zurakowski D, Isler B. Ganz reinforcement ring for reconstruction of acetabular defects in revision total hip arthroplasty. Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery, 2003, 85, 2358–2364.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. [14]
    Jiang H. Static and dynamic mechanics analysis on artificial hip joints with different interface designs by the finite element method. Journal of Bionic Engineering, 2007, 4, 123–131.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. [15]
    Lian Q, Li D, Jin Z, Zhen Wang, Sun Y. Patient-specific design and biomechanical evaluation of a novel bipolar femoral hemi-knee prosthesis. Journal of Bionic Engineering, 2014, 11, 259–267.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. [16]
    Ezquerra L, Quilez M P, Pérez M Á, Albareda J, Seral B. Range of movement for impingement and dislocation avoidance in total hip replacement predicted by finite element model. Journal of Medical and Biological Engineering, 2017, 37, 26–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. [17]
    Reimeringer M, Nuño N. The influence of contact ratio and its location on the primary stability of cementless total hip arthroplasty: A finite element analysis. Journal of Biomechanics, 2016, 49, 1064–1070.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. [18]
    Russell R D, Huo M H, Rodrigues D C, Kosmopoulos V. Stem geometry changes initial femoral fixation stability of a revised press-fit hip prosthesis: A finite element study. Technology and Health Care, 2016, 24, 865–872.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. [19]
    Zhao X, Chosa E, Yamako G, Watanabe S, Deng G, Totoribe K. Effect of acetabular reinforcement ring with hook for acetabular dysplasia clarified by three-dimensional finite element analysis. The Journal of Arthroplasty, 2013, 28, 1765–1769.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. [20]
    Amirouche F, Solitro G F, Walia A, Gonzalez M, Bobko A. Segmental acetabular rim defects, bone loss, oversizing, and press fit cup in total hip arthroplasty evaluated with a probabilistic finite element analysis. International Orthopaedics, 2016, 41, 1527–1533.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. [21]
    Zhang Y, Ahn P B, Fitzpatrick D C, Heiner A D, Poggie R A, Brown T D. Interfacial frictional behavior: Cancellous bone, cortical bone, and a novel porous tantalum biomaterial. Journal of Musculoskeletal Research, 1999, 3, 245–251.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. [22]
    Bergmann G, Deuretzbacher G, Heller M, Graichen F, Rohlmann A, Strauss J, Duda G N. Hip contact forces and gait patterns from routine activities. Journal of Biomechanics, 2001, 34, 859–871.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. [23]
    Kawanabe K, Akiyama H, Goto K, Maeno S, Nakamura T. Load dispersion effects of acetabular reinforcement devices used in revision total hip arthroplasty: A simulation study using finite element analysis. The Journal of Arthroplasty, 2011, 26, 1061–1066.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. [24]
    Park K S, Seon J K, Lee K B, Kim S K, Chan C K, Yoon T R. Revision total hip arthroplasty using an acetabular reinforcement ring with a hook: A precise follow-up, at average 11.4 years, of a previous report. The Journal of Arthroplasty, 2017, 26, 503–509CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. [25]
    Pilliar R M, Lee J M, Maniatopoulos C. Observations on the effect of movement on bone ingrowth into porous-surfaced implants. Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research, 1986, 208, 108–113.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Jilin University 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jianlin Xiao
    • 1
  • Xin Zhao
    • 2
  • Yiming Wang
    • 1
  • Yuhui Yang
    • 1
  • Jianhui Zhao
    • 1
  • Zhongli Gao
    • 1
  • Jianlin Zuo
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of OrthopaedicsChina-Japan Union Hospital of Jilin UniversityChangchunChina
  2. 2.Department of OrthopaedicsThe 2nd Hospital of Jilin UniversityChangchunChina

Personalised recommendations