The biomechanics of metaphyseal cone augmentation in revision knee replacement

No Thumbnail Available
Authors
Hu, J.
Gundry, M.
Zheng, K.
Zhong, J.
Hourigan, P.
Meakin, J. R.
Winlove, C. P.
Toms, A. D.
Knapp, K. M.
Chen, J.
Journal
Journal of the mechanical behavior of biomedical materials
Type
Randomized Controlled Trial
Publisher
Elsevier
Rights
Copyright © 2022 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.
The demand for revision knee replacement (RKR) has increased dramatically with rising patient life expectancy and younger recipients for primary TKR. However, significant challenges to RKR arise from osseous defects, reduced bone quality, potential bone volume loss from implant removal and the need to achieve implant stability. This study utilizes the outcomes of an ongoing RKR clinical trial using porous metaphyseal cones 3D-printed of titanium, to investigate 1) bone mineral density (BMD) changes in three fixation zones (epiphysis, metaphysis, and diaphysis) over a year and 2) the biomechanical effects of the cones at 6 months post-surgery. It combines dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry (DXA), computed tomography (CT) with patient-specific based finite element (FE) modelling. Bone loss (-0.086 ± 0.05 g/cm(2)) was found in most patients over the first year. The biomechanical assessment considered four different loading scenarios from standing, walking on a flat surface, and walking downstairs, to a simulated impact of the knee. The patient-specific FE models showed that the cones marginally improved the strain distribution in the bone and shared the induced load but played a limited role in reducing the risks of bone fracture or cement debonding. This technique of obtaining real live data from a randomized clinical trial and inserting it into an in-silico FE model is unique and innovative in RKR research. The tibia RKR biomechanics examined open up further possibilities, allowing the in-silico testing of prototypes and implant combinations without putting patients at risk as per the recommended IDEAL framework standards. This process with further improvements could allow rapid innovation, optimization of implant design, and improve surgical planning.
Citation
J Mech Behav Biomed Mater. 2022 Jul;131:105233. doi: 10.1016/j.jmbbm.2022.105233. Epub 2022 Apr 17.
Note
Not held