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

Trauma

METAL-BACKED VERSUS ALL-POLYETHYLENE UNICOMPARTMENTAL KNEE ARTHROPLASTY: THE EFFECT OF IMPLANT THICKNESS ON TIBIAL BONE STRAIN IN A VALIDATED FINITE ELEMENT MODEL

Scottish Committee for Orthopaedics and Trauma (SCOT) meeting, January 2016



Abstract

25–40% of unicompartmental knee replacement (UKR) revisions are performed for unexplained pain possibly secondary to elevated proximal tibial bone strain. This study investigates the effect of tibial component metal backing and polyethylene thickness on cancellous bone strain in a finite element model (FEM) of a cemented fixed bearing medial UKR, validated using previously published acoustic emission data (AE).

FEMs of composite tibiae implanted with an all-polyethylene tibial component (AP) and a metal backed one (MB) were created. Polyethylene of thickness 6–10mm in 2mm increments was loaded to a medial load of 2500N. The volume of cancellous bone exposed to <−3000 (pathological overloading) and <−7000 (failure limit) minimum principal (compressive) microstrain (µ∊) and >3000 and >7000 maximum principal (tensile) microstrain was measured.

Linear regression analysis showed good correlation between measured AE hits and volume of cancellous bone elements with compressive strain <−3000µ∊: correlation coefficients (R= 0.947, R2 = 0.847), standard error of the estimate (12.6 AE hits) and percentage error (12.5%) (p<0.001). AP implants displayed greater cancellous bone strains than MB implants for all strain variables at all loads. Patterns of strain differed between implants: MB concentrations at the lateral edge; AP concentrations at the keel, peg and at the region of load application. AP implants had 2.2 (10mm) to 3.2 (6mm) times the volume of cancellous bone compressively strained <−7000µ∊ than the MB implants. Altering MB polyethylene insert thickness had no effect. We advocate using caution with all-polyethylene UKR implants especially in large or active patients where loads are higher.