header advert
Orthopaedic Proceedings Logo

Receive monthly Table of Contents alerts from Orthopaedic Proceedings

Comprehensive article alerts can be set up and managed through your account settings

View my account settings

Visit Orthopaedic Proceedings at:

Loading...

Loading...

Full Access

BIOMECHANICS OF THE BIRMINGHAM HIP RESURFACING ARTHROPLASTY



Abstract

There has been renewed interest in metal-on-metal bearings as hip resurfacing components for treatment in young, active patients. This study examines the effects of fixation (cemented or uncemented heads) and bone-implant interface conditions (stem-bone and head-bone) on the biomechanics of the Birmingham hip resurfacing (BHR) arthroplasty, using high resolution, 3-d computational models of the bilateral pelvis from a 45-year-old donor. Femoral bone stress and strain in the natural and BHR hips were compared. Bone remodelling stimuli were also determined for the BHR hips using changes in strain energy. Proximal femoral bone stress and strain were non-physiological when the BHR femoral component was fixed to bone. The reduction of strain energy within the femoral head was of sufficient magnitude to invoke early bone resorption. Less reduction of stress was demonstrated when the BHR femoral component was completely debonded from bone. Bone apposition around the distal stem was predicted based on the stress and strain transfer through the stem. Femoral stress or strain patterns were not affected by the type of fixation medium used (cemented vs. Uncemented). Analysis of proximal stress and strain shielding in the BHR arthroplasty provides a plausible mechanism for overall structural weakening due to loss of bony support. It is postulated that the proximal bone resorption and distal bone formation may progress to neck thinning as increasing stress and strain transfer occurs through the stem. This may be further exacerbated by additional proximal bone loss through avascular necrosis. Medium term retrieval specimens have shown bone remodelling that is consistent with our results. It is unclear if the clinical consequences of neck thinning will become more evident in longer-term follow-ups of the BHR.

Correspondence should be addressed to The Secretary, BHS, c/o BOA, The Royal College of Surgeons, 35–43 Lincoln’s Inn Fields, London WC2A 3PE.