Radiographic evaluation of mechanically tested cemented total hip arthroplasty femoral components retrieved post-mortem

D. J. Frankel; E. Pluhar; C. P. Skurla; E. L. Egger; S. P. James

doi:10.1055/s-0038-1632816

Veterinary and Comparative Orthopaedics and Traumatology, Table of Contents

Vet Comp Orthop Traumatol 2004; 17(04): 216-224
DOI: 10.1055/s-0038-1632816

Original Research

Schattauer GmbH

Radiographic evaluation of mechanically tested cemented total hip arthroplasty femoral components retrieved post-mortem

D. J. Frankel

¹Pet Emergency and Specialty Center, La Mesa, CA, USA

,

E. Pluhar

²College of Veterinary Medicine, University of Minnesota, St. Paul, MN, USA

,

C. P. Skurla

³Department of Engineering, Baylor University, Waco, TX, USA

,

E. L. Egger

⁴Department of Clinical Sciences, Colorado State University, Fort Collings, CO, USA

,

S. P. James

⁵Department of Biomedical Engineering, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO, USA

› Author Affiliations

Abstract

Summary

Guidelines for assessing total hip arthroplasty (THA) radiographs for femoral implant stability have not been published; therefore, often the determination is subjective. The aim of this study was to identify radiographic criteria for veterinary clinicians to use when evaluating radiographs for femoral implant stability. Specific objectives were to: identify radiographic features associated with canine THA femoral implant loosening, evaluate whether technical recommendations for human femoral component implantation apply to dogs, and evaluate the effectiveness of radiographs for identifying canine THA implant loosening. Post-operative, follow-up, and post-mortem contact radiographs of canine implanted femora retrieved postmortem and mechanically tested for implant stability were evaluated. Based on the results, radiographic evaluation is not an effective means of assessing canine femoral implant stability; however, certain radiographic findings including implant retroversion, cement mantle cracks, or the appearance of cementmetal interface radiolucencies, may be indicative of implant loosening. It was also found that femoral implants completely surrounded by cement mantle of any thickness were less likely to loosen than those with an area lacking cement between the implant and bone. There was also a trend suggesting an association between inferior cement mantle quality and femoral implant loosening. In order to improve cement mantle quality and ensure that implants are completely surrounded by cement mantle, the use of modern cementing techniques is recommended.

Keywords

Hip arthroplasty - femoral implant - post-mortem - radiograph

Full Text

References

References
1 Allen MJ, Hartmann SM, Sacks JM, Calabrese J, Brown PR. Technical feasibility and precision of radiostereometric analysis as an outcome measure in canine cemented total hip replacement. J Orthop Sci 2004; 09: 66-75.
2 Anderson GS, Orlando K, Waddel JP. Synovitis subsequent to total hip arthroplasty with and without hydroxyapatite coatings: a study in dogs. Vet Surg 2001; 30: 311-8.
3 Arnoczky SP, Torzilli PA. Biomechanical analysis of forces acting about the canine hip. Am J Vet Res 1981; 42: 1581-5.
4 Barrack RL, Mulroy RD, Harris WH. Improved cementing techniques and femoral component loosening in young patients with hip arthroplasty. A 12-year radiographic review. J Bone Joint Surg 1992; 74-B: 385-9.
5 Burke DW, O’Connor DO, Zalenski EB, Jasty M, Harris WH. Micromotion of cemented and uncemented femoral components. J Bone Joint Surg 1991; 73-B: 33-7.
6 DeYoung DJ, Schiller RA. Radiographic criteria for evaluation of uncemented total hip replacement in dogs. Vet Surg 1992; 21: 88-98.
7 Ebramzadeh E, Sarmiento A, McKellop HA, Llinas A, Gogan W. The cement mantle in total hip arthroplasty: analysis of long-term radiographic results. J Bone Joint Surg 1994; 76-A: 77-87.
8 Edwards MR, Egger EL, Schwarz PD. Aseptic loosening of the femoral implant after cemented total hip arthroplasty in dogs: 11 cases in 10 dogs (1991-1995). J Am Vet Med Assoc 1997; 211: 580-6.
9 El-Warrak AO, Olmstead ML, von Rechenberg B, Auer J. A review of aseptic loosening in total hip arthroplasty. Vet Comp Orthop Traumatol 2001; 14: 115-24.
10 Gofton N, Sumner-Smith G. Total hip prosthesis for revision of unsuccessful excision arthroplasty. Vet Surg 1982; 11: 134-9.
11 Harris WH, McCarthy JC, O’Neil DA. Femoral component loosening using contemporary techniques of femoral cement fixation. J Bone Joint Surg 1982; 64-A: 1063-7.
12 Jasty M, Maloney WJ, Bragdon CR, O’Connor DO, Haire T, Harris WH. The initiation of failure in cemented femoral components of hip arthroplasties. J Bone Joint Surg 1991; 73-B: 551-8.
13 Jehn CT, Manley PA. The effects of femur and implant position on the radiographic assessment of total hip femoral implants in dogs. Vet Surg 2002; 31: 349-57.
14 Johnston RC, Fitzgerald RH, Harris WH, Poss R, Muller ME, Sledge CB. Clinical and radiographic evaluation of total hip replacement. J Bone Joint Surg 1990; 72-A: 161-8.
15 Karrholm J, Herberts P, Haultmark P, Malchau H, Nivbrant B, Thanner J. Radiostereometry of hip prostheses. Review of methodology and clinical results. Clin Orthop 1997; 344: 94-110.
16 Klapach AS, Callahan JJ, Goetz DD, Olejniczak JP, Johnston RC. Charnley total hip arthroplasty with use of improved cementing techniques. A minimum twenty-year follow-up study. J Bone Joint Surg 2001; 83-A: 1840-8.
17 Konde LJ, Olmstead ML, Hohn RB. Radiographic evaluation of total hip replacement in the dog. Vet Radiol 1982; 23: 98-106.
18 Lewis RH, Jones Jr JP. A clinical study of canine total hip arthroplasty. Vet Surg 1980; 09: 20-3.
19 Maloney WJ, Jasty M, Burke DW, O’Connor DO, Zalenski EB, Bragdon C, Harris WH. Biomechanical and histologic investigation of cemented total hip arthroplasties: a study of autopsy-retrieved femurs after in vivo cycling. Clin Orthop 1989; 249: 129-40.
20 Massat BJ, Vasseur PB. Clinical and radiographic results of total hip arthroplasty in dogs: 96 cases (1986-1992). J Am Vet Med Assoc 1994; 205: 448-54.
21 Mohler CG, Callahan JJ, Collis DK, Johnston RC. Early loosening of the femoral component at the cement-prosthesis interface after total hip replacement. J Bone Joint Surg 1995; 77-A: 1315-21.
22 Mulroy WF, Estok DM, Harris WH. Total hip arthroplasty with use of so-called second generation cementing techniques. J Bone Joint Surg 1995; 77-A: 1845-52.
23 Nistor L, Blaha JD, Kjellstrom U, Selvik G. In vivo measurement of relative motion between an uncemented femoral total hip component and the femur by roentgen stereophotogrammetry. Trans Orthop Res Soc 1987; 12: 485.
24 O’Connor DO, Burke DW, Sedlacek RC, Lozynsky AL, Harris WH. A new method for measuring relative motion between a total joint component and adjacent cortical bone. Trans Soc Biomaterials 1993; 16: 122.
25 Olmstead ML. The canine cemented modular total hip prosthesis. J Am An Hosp Assoc 1995; 109-23.
26 Olmstead ML. Total hip replacement in the dog. Sem Vet Med Surg (SA) 1987; 02: 131-40.
27 Olmstead ML, Hohn RB, Turner TM. A fiveyear study of 221 total hip replacements in the dog. J Am Vet Med Assoc 1983; 183: 191-4.
28 Page AE, Allan C, Jasty M, Harrigan TP, Bragdon CR, Harris WH. Determination of loading parameters in the canine hip in vivo. J Biomech 1993; 26: 571-9.
29 Papageorges M, Sande RD. The Mach phenomenon. Vet Radiol 1990; 06: 274-80.
30 Parker RB, Bloomberg MS, Bitetto W, Rodkey WG. Canine total hip arthroplasty: a clinical review of 20 cases. J Am Vet Med Assoc 1984; 20: 97-104.
31 Parker RB, Spencer CP, Bloomberg MS, Bitetto W, Rodkey WG. Canine total hip arthroplasty: a radiographic correlation of clinical results in 20 cases. J Am An Hosp Assoc 1982; 20: 105-13.
32 Paul HA, Bargar WL. A modified technique for canine total hip replacement. J Am An Hosp Assoc 1987; 23: 13-8.
33 Ramaniraka NA, Rakotomanana LR, Leyvraz PF. The fixation of the cemented femoral component: effects of stem stiffness, cement thickness and roughness of the cement-bone surface. J Bone Joint Surg 2000; 82-B: 297-303.
34 Reading AD, McCaskie AW, Gregg PJ. The inadequacy of standard radiographs in detecting flaws in the cement mantle. J Bone Joint Surg 1999; 81-B: 167-70.
35 Schmalzried TP, Maloney WJ, Jasty M, Kwong LM, Harris WH. Autopsy studies of the bonecement interface in well-fixed cemented total hip arthroplasties. J Arthroplasty 1993; 08: 179-88.
36 Schmalzried TP, Harris WH. Hybrid total hip replacement. A 6.5-year follow-up study. J Bone Joint Surg 1993; 75-B: 608-15.
37 Schulz KS. Application of arthroplasty principles to canine cemented total hip replacement. Vet Surg 2000; 29: 578-93.
38 Schulz KS. Effect of surgical technique and use of a rigid centralizing device on stem positioning and geometric reconstruction in the sagittal plane during total hip replacement in canine cadavers. Am J Vet Res 1999; 60: 1126-35.
39 Schulz KS, Vasseur PB, Stover SM, Kass PH. Transverse plane evaluation of the effects of surgical technique on stem positioning and geometry of reconstruction in canine total hip replacement. Am J Vet Res 1998; 59: 1071-9.
40 Skurla CP, Pluhar GE, Frankel DJ, Egger EL, James SP. Assessing the dog as a model for human total hip replacement: Analysis of 38 postmortem retrieved canine cemented femoral components. J Bone Joint Surg (Br). in press.
41 Skurla CP. Postmortem retrieval analysis of total hip arthroplasty in dogs. PhD dissertation. Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO; 2002
42 Skurla CP, James SP, Wheeler DL, Pluhar GE. Long-term wear and mechanical stability analysis of 38 post-mortem retrieved canine total hip replacements. Trans Orthop Res Soc 2002; 27: 979.
43 Skurla CP, Egger EL, Schwarz PD, James SP. Owner assessment of the outcome of total hip arthroplasty in dogs. J Am Vet Med Assoc 2000; 217: 1010-2.