Abstract
Study Aim
Femoral components used in total knee arthroplasty (TKA) are primarily designed on the basis of kinematics and ease of fixation. This study considers the stress-strain environment in the distal femur due to different implant internal geometry variations (based on current industry standards) using finite element (FE) analyses. Both two and three dimensional models are considered for a range of physiological loading scenarios – from full extension to deep flexion. Issues associated with micro-motion at the bone-implant interface are also considered.
Materials and methods
Two (plane strain) and three dimensional finite element analyses were conducted to examine implant micro-motions and stability. The simple 2D models were used to examine the influence of anterior-posterior (AP) flange angle on implant stability. AP slopes of 3°, 7° and 11° were considered with contact between bone and implant interfaces being modeled using the standard coulomb friction model. The direction and region of loading was based on loading experienced at full extension, 90° flexion and 135° flexion. Three main model variations were created for the 3D analyses, the first model represented an intact distal femur, the second a primary implanted distal femur and the third a distal femur implanted with a posterior stabilising implant. Further each of the above 3D model sets were divided into two group, the first used a frictional interface between the bone and implant to characterise the behavior of uncemented implants post TKA and the second group assumed 100% osseointegration had already taken place and focused on examining the subsequent stress/strain environment in the femur with respect to different femoral component geometries relative the intact distal femur model.
Results and Discussion
Analyses indicate a trend relating the slope of the anterior-posterior (AP) flange to implant loosening at high flexion angles for uncemented components. Once cemented, this becomes less important. Results from the 3D analyses show that the posterior stabilising implant causes stress concentrations which can lead to bicondylar fatigue fracture. All femoral components cause stress shielding in cancellous bone particularly when they are fully bonded. Investigations into implant micromotion show that revision implants with box sections provided more resistance to micromotion than the pegged primary implants. However for the gait cycle tested the maximum recorded micromotion of both implants was well within acceptable levels for osseointegration to occur.
