Introduction: Stemmed tibial implants are used in total knee arthroplasties requiring additional support due to deficient proximal bone. Surgeries involving intramedullary stems have a clinical track record with cement fixation. In recent years in the United States, these stemmed implants have also been implanted with hybrid fixation, where only the metaphyseal region is cemented and a canal filling stem is used. Overall, hybrid fixation has shown 5-20% failure rates up to 6 years post-operatively, but long-term results are not yet available. To better understand the implant and surgical parameters which may affect the long-term clinical outcome, both experimental and computational studies have been performed to investigate initial post-operative implant motion. However, to-date an experimentally validated specimen-specific computational model has not been previously created.
Methods: In-vitro testing was performed on seven matched-pair tibias with modular stemmed tibial implants with hybrid fixation. Motion of the tray and stem, along with the bone, were measured using an optical motion capture system in which the precision, repeatability, and accuracy were measured to be less than 10 ^m for the current test set-up. In-vitro data provided analysis of both the rigid body assumption of the stemmed implant, and assessment of relative implant-bone motion. A specimen-specific finite element (FE) model was created from pre- and post-operative computed tomography (CT) data. The model was tuned to the in-vitro data using both one-factor-at-a-time and factorial analyses. The tuned FE model was used to investigate the effect fixation and bone densities have on initial post-operative implant motion.
Results: In-vitro tray-stem motion was found in the anterior-posterior and medial-lateral directions. Implant-bone motion was greatest in the proximal-distal direction, with the tray having more relative motion than the stem tip. In addition, high variability in relative motion was measured both between and among specimen. No correlations were found between implantbone motion and stem size, tibial tray coverage, age, gender, or bone density. Sensitivity studies on the FE model found the bone's deflection in bending was significantly affected by the definition of bone density and the empirical relationship used to define elastic modulus. The distal and proximal constraints of the FE model were found to have the largest effect on the motion of the bone, tray and stem. The tuned FE model found decreased implant-bone motion with cement fixation, compared to hybrid fixation, as well as normal bone density, compared to osteoporotic bone density.
Conclusions: A tuned specimen-specific FE model of a modular stemmed implant in a tibial bone was created. The CT-to-FE protocol provides a method for accurate FE model creation and parameter assessment through sensitivity studies. With additional tuning, the current FE model can be used to evaluate both implant and surgical parameters to provide predictions for long-term clinical results.
|1991||Snyder SM, Schneider E. Estimation of mechanical properties of cortical bone by computed tomography. J Orthop Res. May 1991;9(3):422-431.|
|1989||Ashman RB, Rho JY, Turner CH. Anatomical variation of orthotropic elastic moduli of the proximal human tibia. J Biomech. 1989;22(8-9):895-900.|
|2004||Taddei F, Pancanti A, Viceconti M. An improved method for the automatic mapping of computed tomography numbers onto finite element models. Med Eng Phys. 2004;26(1):61-69.|
|1990||Keyak JH, Meagher JM, Skinner HB, Mote CD Jr. Automated three-dimensional finite element modelling of bone: a new method. J Biomed Eng. 1990;12(5):389-397.|
|1997||Camacho DLA, Hopper RH, Lin GM, Myers BS. An improved method for finite element mesh generation of geometrically complex structures with application to the skullbase. J Biomech. 1997;30(10):1067-1070.|
|1991||Ciarelli MJ, Goldstein SA, Kuhn JL, Cody DD, Brown MB. Evaluation of orthogonal mechanical properties and density of human trabecular bone from the major metaphyseal regions with materials testing and computed tomography. J Orthop Res. 1991;9(5):674-682.|
|2008||Schileo E, Dall’Ara E, Taddei F, Malandrino A, Schotkamp T, Baleani M, Viceconti M. An accurate estimation of bone density improves the accuracy of subject-specific finite element models. J Biomech. August 7, 2008;41(11):2483-2491.|
|2000||Charras GT, Guldberg RE. Improving the local solution accuracy of large-scale digital image-based finite element analyses. J Biomech. February 2000;33(2):255-259.|
|1985||McBroom RJ, Hayes WC, Edwards WT, Goldberg RP, White AA III. Prediction of vertebral body compressive fracture using quantitative computed tomography. J Bone Joint Surg. 1985;67A(8):1206-1214.|
|1998||Viceconti M, Bellingeri L, Cristofolini L, Toni A. A comparative study on different methods of automatic mesh generation of human femurs. Med Eng Phys. January 1998;20(1):1-10.|
|1966||McElhaney JH. Dynamic response of bone and muscle tissue. J Appl Physiol. 1966;21(4):1231-1236.|
|2004||Dong XN, Guo XE. The dependence of transversely isotropic elasticity of human femoral cortical bone on porosity. J Biomech. August 2004;37(8):1281-1287.|
|1990||Lotz JC, Gerhart TN, Hayes WC. Mechanical properties of trabecular bone from the proximal femur: a quantitative CT study. J Comput Assist Tomogr. January–February 1990;14(1):107-114.|
|1989||Hvid I, Bentzen SM, Linde F, Mosekilde L, Pongsoipetch B. X-ray quantitative computed tomography: the relations to physical properties of proximal tibial trabecular bone specimens. J Biomech. 1989;22(8-9):837-844.|
|1989||Esses SI, Lotz JC, Hayes WC. Biomechanical properties of the proximal femur determined in vitro by single‐energy quantitative computed tomography. J Bone Miner Res. October 1989;4(5):715-722.|
|1980||Carter DR, Schwab GH, Spengler DM. Tensile fracture of cancellous bone. Acta Orthop Scand. 1980;51(5):733-741.|
|1999||Van Rietbergen B, Müller R, Ulrich D, Rüegsegger P, Huiskes R. Tissue stresses and strain in trabeculae of a canine proximal femur can be quantified from computer reconstructions. J Biomech. February 1999;32(2):165-173.|
|2003||Morgan EF, Bayraktar HH, Keaveny TM. Trabecular bone modulus–density relationships depend on anatomic site. J Biomech. 2003;36(7):897-904.|
|1995||Rho JY, Hobatho MC, Ashman RB. Relations of mechanical properties to density and CT numbers in human bone. Med Eng Phys. July 1995;17(5):347-355.|
|1997||Hobatho M-C, Rho JY, Ashman RB. Anatomical variation of human cancellous bone mechanical properties in vitro. Stud Health Technol Inform. 1997;40:157-173.|
|1991||Lotz JC, Gerhart TN, Hayes WC. Mechanical properties of metaphyseal bone in the proximal femur. J Biomech. 1991;24(5):317-329.|
|1999||Jacobs CR, Davis BR, Rieger CJ, Francis JJ, Saad M, Fyhrie DP. The impact of boundary conditions and mesh size on the accuracy of cancellous bone tissue modulus determination using large-scale finite-element modeling. J Biomech. November 1999;32(11):1159-1164.|
|1988||Mazess RB, Barden H, Ettinger M, Schultz E. Bone density of the radius, spine, and proximal femur in osteoporosis. J Bone Miner Res. February 1988;3(1):13-18.|