Comparison of the strength characteristics of a carbon friction pair of a hip joint endoprosthesis, including components from monolithic or non-monolithic pyrolytic carbon
https://doi.org/10.18019/1028-4427-2023-29-5-495-499
EDN: YYBCUT
Abstract
Introduction The problem a large number of revision operations due to aseptic loosening after primary hip arthroplasty necessitates the search for a new material for a friction pair. The pyrocarbon, which has high tribological characteristics, can be used both in a monolithic and in a prefabricated design; however, the manufacture of a monolithic pyrocarbon block complicates production.
Aim Compare the strength characteristics of the stem head and liner designs with monolithic and non-monolithic pyrocarbon.
Materials and methods To assess the reliability of the designs, a digital mathematical model of the head and liner implants with a monolithic and non-monolithic pyrocarbon component was built. After the manufacture of prototypes friction pairs, an assessment of the static load on bench tests was carried out.
Results While analyzing the mathematical model, the construct of non‑monolithic pyrocarbon broke in one of the experiments, while the strength of the construct of monolithic pyrocarbon was 4.5 times higher than the stresses arising under load. While studying the maximum static load, the friction pair from monolithic pyrocarbon exceeded the maximum possible load in the human hip joint by 5 times.
Discussion The studies allow us to be confident about the reliability of the design in in vitro studies, which will create conditions for reducing the number of revision surgeries after hip arthroplasty.
Conclusion Based on the data obtained, the design of the head and liner of the hip joint endoprosthesis with a friction pair made of carbon material will provide high reliability under conditions of functioning in the hip joint at maximum loads. It serves as a prerequisite for conducting a clinical study of the proposed friction pair.
About the Authors
A. N. MitroshinRussian Federation
Alexander N. Mitroshin – Doctor of Medical Sciences, Professor, Director of the Medical Institute
Penza
M. A. Ksenofontov
Russian Federation
Mikhail A. Ksenofontov – Senior Lecturer
Penza
D. A. Kosmynin
Russian Federation
Dmitriy A. Kosmynin – Senior Lecturer
Penza
References
1. Корьяк В.А., Сороковиков В.А., Свистунов В.В., Шарова Т.В. Эпидемиология коксартроза. Сибирский медицинский журнал. 2013;(8):39-45.
2. Mihalko WM, Haider H, Kurtz S, et al. New materials for hip and knee joint replacement: What's hip and what's in kneed? J Orthop Res. 2020;38(7):1436-1444. doi: 10.1002/jor.24750
3. Neuprez A, Neuprez AH, Kaux JF, et al. Total joint replacement improves pain, functional quality of life, and health utilities in patients with latestage knee and hip osteoarthritis for up to 5 years. Clin Rheumatol. 2020;39(3):861-871. doi: 10.1007/s10067-019-04811-y
4. Загородний Н.В. Состояние и качество травматолого-ортопедической помощи в Российской Федерации. Медицинский вестник МВД. 2019;(6(103)):2-6.
5. Загородний Н.В., Алексанян О.А., Чрагян Г.А. и др. Реконструкция вертлужной впадины с использованием компонентов из трабекулярного металла. Вестник травматологии и ортопедии им. Приорова. 2019;(26)1:5-10. doi: 10.17116/vto20190115
6. Вороков А.А., Бортулев П.И., Хайдаров В.М. и др. Эндопротезирование тазобедренного и коленного суставов: показания к операции. Ортопедия, травматология и восстановительная хирургия детского возраста. 2020;8(3):355-364. doi: 10.17816/PTORS34164
7. Castiello E, Moghnie A, Tigani D, Affatato S. Dual mobility cup in hip arthroplasty: An in-depth analysis of joint registries. Artif Organs. 2022;46(5):804-812. doi: 10.1111/aor.14015
8. Николаев Н.С., Пчелова Н.Н., Преображенская Е.В. и др. "Неожиданные" инфекции при асептических ревизиях. Травматология и ортопедия России. 2021;27(3):56-70. doi: 10.21823/2311-2905-2021-27-3-56-70
9. Kummerant J, Wirries N, Derksen A, et al. The etiology of revision total hip arthroplasty: current trends in a retrospective survey of 3450 cases. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 2020;140(9):1265-1273. doi: 10.1007/s00402-020-03514-3
10. Румянцев Ю.И. Лучевая диагностика осложнений после эндопротезирования тазобедренного и коленного суставов. Радиология – практика. 2013;(1):37-45.
11. Sharkey PF, Lichstein PM, Shen C, et al. Why are total knee arthroplasties failing today--has anything changed after 10 years? J Arthroplasty. 2014;29(9):1774-1778. doi: 10.1016/j.arth.2013.07.024
12. Sadoghi P, Liebensteiner M, Agreiter M, et al. Revision surgery after total joint arthroplasty: a complication-based analysis using worldwide arthroplasty registers. J Arthroplasty. 2013;28(8):1329-32. doi: 10.1016/j.arth.2013.01.012
13. Мурылев В.Ю., Усубалиев Б.Т., Музыченков А.В. и др. Остеопороз и асептическое расшатывание компонентов эндопротеза после эндопротезирования суставов. Кафедра травматологии и ортопедии. 2022;(4):67-73. doi: 10.17238/2226-2016-2022-4-67-73
14. Broomfield JA, Malak TT, Thomas GE, et al. The Relationship Between Polyethylene Wear and Periprosthetic Osteolysis in Total Hip Arthroplasty at 12 Years in a Randomized Controlled Trial Cohort. J Arthroplasty. 2017;32(4):1186-1191. doi: 10.1016/j.arth.2016.10.037
15. Брагина С.В. Современные возможности ранней лабораторной диагностики перипротезного остеолиза как предиктора развития асептической нестабильности эндопротеза тазобедренного сустава (обзор литературы). Гений ортопедии. 2020;26(2):261-265. doi: 10.18019/1028- 4427-2020-26-2-261-265
16. Лапин Д.В., Паршиков М.В., Гурьев В.В. и др. Факторы риска и причины осложнений при эндопротезировании тазобедренного сустава (обзор литературы). Кафедра травматологии и ортопедии. 2022;(1):66-75. doi: 10.17238/2226-20162022-1-66-75
17. Gallo J, Raska M, Mrázek F, Petrek M. Bone remodeling, particle disease and individual susceptibility to periprosthetic osteolysis. Physiol Res. 2008;57(3):339-349. doi: 10.33549/physiolres.931140
18. Baranowska A, Płusa T, Baranowski P, et al. Is aseptic loosening of joint prostheses aseptic? Pol Merkur Lekarski. 2022;50(299):318-322. (In Polish.)
19. Merola M, Affatato S. Materials for Hip Prostheses: A Review of Wear and Loading Considerations. Materials (Basel). 2019;12(3):495. doi: 10.3390/ ma12030495
20. Affatato S, Spinelli M, Squarzoni S, et al. Mixing and matching in ceramic-on-metal hip arthroplasty: an in-vitro hip simulator study. J Biomech. 2009;42(15):2439-2446. doi: 10.1016/j.jbiomech.2009.07.031
21. Al-Hajjar M, Jennings LM, Begand S, et al. Wear of novel ceramic-on-ceramic bearings under adverse and clinically relevant hip simulator conditions. J Biomed Mater Res B Appl Biomater. 2013;101(8):1456-62. doi: 10.1002/jbm.b.32965
22. Al-Hajjar M, Carbone S, Jennings LM, et al. Wear of composite ceramics in mixed-material combinations in total hip replacement under adverse edge loading conditions. J Biomed Mater Res B Appl Biomater. 2017;105(6):1361-1368. doi: 10.1002/jbm.b.33671
23. Kurtz SM, Ong KL, Schmier J, et al. Future clinical and economic impact of revision total hip and knee arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2007;89 Suppl 3:144-151. doi: 10.2106/JBJS.G.00587
24. Kurtz S, Ong K, Lau E, et al. Projections of primary and revision hip and knee arthroplasty in the United States from 2005 to 2030. JBone Joint SurgAm. 2007;89(4):780-785. doi: 10.2106/JBJS.F.00222
25. Rajeshshyam R, Chockalingam K, Gayathri V, Prakash T. Reduction of metallosis in hip implant using thin film coating. In AIP Conference Proceedings; AIP Publishing LLC: Melville. 2018;1943(1):020090. doi: 10.1063/1.5029666
26. Мохаммади М.Т., Пашкевич Л.А., Эйсмонт О.Л. и др. Анализ патоморфологических изменений при первичном и ревизионном эндопротезировании коленного сустава. Медицинские новости. 2021;(2):56-59.
27. Purudappa PP, Sharma OP, Priyavadana S, et al. Unexpected positive intraoperative cultures (UPIC) in revision Hip and knee arthroplasty - A review of the literature. J Orthop. 2019;17:1-6. doi: 10.1016/j.jor.2019.06.028
28. Таштанов Б.Р., Корыткин А.А., Павлов В.В., Шубняков И.И. Раскол керамического вкладыша эндопротеза тазобедренного сустава: клинический случай. Травматология и ортопедия России. 2022;28(3):63-73. doi: 10.17816/2311-2905-1804
29. Mattei L, Di Puccio F, Ciulli E, et al. Experimental investigation on wear map evolution of ceramic-on-UHMWPE hip prosthesis. Tribol. Int. 2020;143:106068. doi: 10.1016/j.triboint.2019.106068
30. Jäger M, van Wasen A, Warwas S, et al. A multicenter approach evaluating the impact of vitamin e-blended polyethylene in cementless total hip replacement. Orthop Rev (Pavia). 2014;6(2):5285. doi: 10.4081/or.2014.5285
Review
For citations:
Mitroshin A.N., Ksenofontov M.A., Kosmynin D.A. Comparison of the strength characteristics of a carbon friction pair of a hip joint endoprosthesis, including components from monolithic or non-monolithic pyrolytic carbon. Genij Ortopedii. 2023;29(5):495-499. https://doi.org/10.18019/1028-4427-2023-29-5-495-499. EDN: YYBCUT