4.5 Article

Probabilistic analysis of the influence of the bonding degree of the stem-cement interface in the performance of cemented hip prostheses

Journal

JOURNAL OF BIOMECHANICS
Volume 39, Issue 10, Pages 1859-1872

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.jbiomech.2005.05.025

Keywords

cement; fatigue life prediction; probabilistic fatigue; probabilistic finite elements; damage evolution; B-models

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The long-term behavior of the stem-cement interface is one of the most frequent topics of discussion in the design of cemented total hip replacements, especially with regards to the process of damage accumulation in the cement layer. This effect is analyzed here comparing two different situations of the interface: completely bonded and debonded with friction. This comparative analysis is performed using a probabilistic computational approach that considers the variability and uncertainty of determinant factors that directly compromise the damage accumulation in the cement mantle. This stochastic technique is based on the combination of probabilistic finite elements (PFEM) and a cumulative damage approach known as B-model. Three random variables were considered: muscle and joint contact forces at the hip (both for walking and stair climbing), cement damage and fatigue properties of the cement. The results predicted that the regions with higher failure probability in the bulk cement are completely different depending on the stem-cement interface characteristics. In a bonded interface, critical sites appeared at the distal and medial parts of the cement, while for debonded interfaces, the critical regions were found distally and proximally. In bonded interfaces, the failure probability was higher than in debonded ones. The same conclusion may be established for stair climbing in comparison with walking activity. (c) 2005 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available