Mechanical Effect of the Articulating Materials on the Proximal Femur and the Femoral Stem in Total Hip Arthroplasty

  • Ye-Yeon Won
  • Kyoung Ho Moon
  • Y.-S. Yu
  • L.-S. Hyup
  • W.-Q. Cui
Conference paper
Part of the Ceramics in Orthopaedics book series (CIO)


Many factors contribute to failure of a hip arthroplasty. These include infection, instability, fracture and loosening of implants, and malalignment of the artificial joint component. Recently, many clinical reports have demonstrated that osteolysis and aseptic loosening are associated with wear debris from the articulating surface [7,13,14,17,19]. Therefore, research over the past several decades have focused on the reduction of the particle debris. For example, many types of materials have been used as artificial joint components. However, little information is available concerning the stress distribution pattern and the micromotion of the proximal femur and the femoral stem associated with the use of these materials in total hip arthroplasty. Therefore, the purpose of this study is to evaluate the effect of three different articulating materials used in total hip arthroplasty on the stress and micromotion of the proximal femur and femoral stem.


Proximal Femur Femoral Stem Stair Climbing Stress Distribution Pattern Ceramic Femur Head 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Ando M, Imura S, Omori H, et al (1999) Nonlinear Three Dimensional Finite Element Analysis of Newly Designed Cementless Total Hip Stems. Artificial Organ, 23(3):339–346.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bergmann G, Graichen F, Rohlmann A (1993) Hip joint loading during walking and running, measured in two patients. J Biomech 26:969–690.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Clarke I, Willmann G (1994) Structural ceramics in orthopedics. In: Cameron HU (ed) Bone Implant Interface. St Louis, Mo: Mosby, pp203.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Kim SK (1997) Comparative stress analysis of the straight and the curved stem on stress shielding-A three dimensional finite element analysis. J of Korean Hip 9(1):82–91.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Kim YH, Yoon SH, Kim JS (2007) Changes in the bone mineral density in the acetabulum and proximal femur after cementless total hip replacement. J Bone Joint Surg 89-B:174–179.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Kupier JH, Huiskes R (1996) Friction and Stem Stiffness Affect Dynamic Interface Motion in Total Hip Replacement. J Orthop Res 14;36–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Maloney WJ, Peters P, Engh CA, Chandler H (1993) Osteolysis of the pelvis in association with acetabular replacement without cement. J Bone Joint Surg 77-A:1301–1310.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Moroi HH, Okimoto K, Moroi R, Terada Y (1993) Numeric approach to the biomechanical analysis of thermal effects in coated implants. Int J Prosthodont 6:564–572.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Otani T, Whiteside LA, White SE, McCarty DS (1993) Effect of femoral component material properties on cementless fixation in total hip arthroplasty. J Arthrop 8:67–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Otani T, Whitesode LA, White SE (1993) Strain Distribution in the Proximal Femur with Flexible Composite and Metallic Femoral Components under Axial and Torsional Loads J. Biomed Materials Res 27;575–585.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Park JB and Lakes RS (1992) BIOMATERAL An Introduction Second Edition, Pleum Publishing Corporation.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Pilliar RM, Lee JM, Maniatopoulos C (1986) Observations on the effect of movement on bone ingrowth into porous-surfaced implants. Clin Orthop 208:108–113.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Santavirta S, Hoikka V, Eskola A, Konttinen YT, Paavilainen T, Tallroth K (1990) Aggressive granulomatous lesions in cementless total hip arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg 72-B:980–984.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Schmalzried TP, Justy M, Harris WH (1992): Periprosthetic bone loss in total hip arthroplasty. Polyethylene wear debris and the concept of the effective joint space. J Bone Joint Surg 74-A:849–863.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Semlitsch M, Dawihl W (1994): Basic requirements for alumina ceramic in artificial hip joint balls articulation with polyethylene cups. In: Buchhorn GH, Willer HG, eds. Technical Principles, Wash: Hogrefe & Huber Publ.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Shin JH Lee KH (1999) Metals as Biomaterials. Biomaterial Research 3(1):28–33.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Tanzer M, Maloney WJ, Jasty M, Haris WH (1992) The progression of femoral cortical osteolysis in associated with total hip arthroplasty without cement. J Bone Joint Surg 74-A:404–410.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Won YY, Ahn JI, Yoo SH, Byun CJ, Choi WS, Cho JH (1999) Finite Element Analysis for Micromotion of Femoral Stem and Stress Concentration of Femur after Removal of DHS System, J of Korean Hip Society, 11(1), June.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Xenos JS, Hopkinson WJ, Callaghan JJ, Heekin RD Savory CG (1995) Osteolysis around an uncemented cobalt chrome total hip arthroplasty. Clin Orthop 317:29–36.PubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Steinkopff Verlag 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  • Ye-Yeon Won
    • 1
  • Kyoung Ho Moon
    • 2
  • Y.-S. Yu
  • L.-S. Hyup
  • W.-Q. Cui
  1. 1.Department of Orthopedic SurgeryAjou University School of MedicineKyung-Ki-DoKorea
  2. 2.Department of Orthopedic SurgeryInha University HospitalIncheonKorea

Personalised recommendations