Abstract
Introduction
Mechanically-assisted corrosion of the head-neck junction present a dilemma to surgeons at revision THR whenever the femoral component is rigidly fixed to the femur. Many remove the damaged femoral head, clean the femoral taper and fix a new head in place to spare the patient the risks associated with extraction and replacement of the well-functioning femoral stem. This study was performed to answer these research questions:
-
Will new metal heads restore the mechanical integrity of the original modular junction after impaction on corroded tapers?
-
Which variables affect the stability of the new interface created at revision THR?
Materials and Methods
Twenty-two tapers (CoCr, n=12; TiAlV, n=10) were obtained for use in this study. Ten stems were in pristine condition, while 12 stems had been retrieved at revision THR and with corrosion damage to the trunnion (Goldberg scale 4). Twenty-two new metal heads were obtained for use in the study, each matching the taper and manufacturer of the original component. The following test states were performed using a MTS Machine: 1. Assembly, 2. Disassembly, 3. Assembly, 4. Toggling and 5. Disassembly. All head assemblies were performed wet using 50% calf serum in accordance to ISO 7206-10. During toggling, each specimen's loading axis was aligned 25° to the trunnion axis in the frontal plane and 10° in the sagittal plane (Figure 1). Toggling was performed at 1Hz for 2,000 cycles with a sinusoidal loading function (230N–4300N). During loading, 3D motion of the head-trunnion junction was measured using a custom jig rigidly attached to the head and the neck of each prosthesis. Relative displacement of the head with respect to the neck was continuously monitored using 6 high resolution displacement transducers with an accuracy of ±0.6µm. Displacement data was independently validated using FEA models of selected constructs.
Results
The average micromotion of the head vs trunnion interface was greatest at the start of loading and stabilized after approximately 50 loading cycles at an average of 30.6±3.2µm (Figure 2). For CoCr couples, interface motion dropped by 17% when a pristine head was mounted on a corroded stem compared to a new stem (25.7±2.7µm (pristine stem), vs. 30.1±4.6µm (corroded stem), p= 0.4023) (Figure 3). However, addition of a new CoCr head with a corroded titanium stem led to an 73% increase in interface motion after assembly with a new CoCr head (Corroded: 43.4±9.8µm, Pristine: 25.2±7.0µm, p=0.1661). The resistance to head-neck disruption was 15% higher in TIALV/CoCr couples compared to CoCr/CoCr (TiAlV: 2558 ±63N, CoCr: 2226±99N, p=0.0111) and was not affected by the presence of corrosion of the trunnion (1% loss of strength in each case).
Discussion
Corrosion at the trunnion does not disrupt the mechanical integrity of the junction when a CoCr head is replaced on a CoCr taper. We are less sure about the mechanical integrity of a TiAlV taper demonstrated by a trend towards increased micromotion at this junction. Further work is required to better elucidate the role of dissimilar metals in the mechanical integrity of the head-neck junction.
