A model of uniaxial implant seating by impaction

Bishop, Nick; Wright, Phil; Dudrey-Harvey, C.; Preutenborbeck, Martin

doi:10.1016/j.medengphy.2021.09.009

Cited by 2 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 24 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…It is assumed that this can represent the seating resistance for dynamic (impacted) implant seating. This has been confirmed for polyurethane foam bone substitutes [27] but remains to be tested for bone. However, this is a practical method of simulating press fit implicitly.…”

Section: Plos Onementioning

confidence: 73%

“…Consequently, axial vibration frequencies should also be correctly modelled in the current model and indeed, the impaction stress waves were observed to travel along components at the speed of sound c, based on the elastic modulus E and density of the material ρ according to c ¼ ffi ffi ffi ffi ffi ffi ffi ffi E=r p (for example, c steel �6000m/s), as would be expected. It is noted that the dependence of implant seating on the hammer tip stiffness (which determines the peak applied force) shown for a wide range in Fig 7 is shown in [27] to be a characteristic saturation function. It was shown that this function can be scaled to any system, according to the peak of the applied force, the applied hammer impulse, the resistance to implant seating and the implanted mass.…”

Section: Model Limitationsmentioning

confidence: 90%

“…The combined axial components of the friction resistance and radial press-fit forces during seating of the implant were represented by axial force-displacement data measured experimentally for quasistatic push-in of a porous-coated stem in good quality cadaveric bone. This approach is detailed and validated in [27]. Relative displacement between stem and bone was permitted only in the seating direction, representing irreversible implant seating due to friction.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…For the implant-bone interface the spring constant c e = c interface was derived from experimentally measured force-displacement implant push-in data ( [27], see above). Friction seating of the stem was permitted for:…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The authors have recently published experimental measurements of implant seating by impaction of a fluted titanium alloy revision stem in foam surrogates for bone [27]. A single lumped mass model of implant seating based on quasistatic measurements of resistance to implantation was validated against the data.…”

Section: Model Limitationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

A parametric numerical analysis of femoral stem impaction

Bishop

Wright²,

Preutenborbeck³

2022

PLoS ONE

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Press-fitted implants are implanted by impaction to ensure adequate seating, but without overloading the components, the surgeon, or the patient. To understand this interrelationship a uniaxial discretised model of the hammer/introducer/implant/bone/soft-tissues was developed. A parametric analysis of applied energy, component materials and geometry, and interactions between implant and bone and between bone and soft-tissues was performed, with implant seating and component stresses as outcome variables. To reduce the impaction effort (energy) required by the surgeon for implant seating and also reduce stresses in the hardware the following outcomes were observed: Reduce energy per hit with more hits / Increase hammer mass / Decrease introducer mass / Increase implant-bone resistance (eg stem roughness). Hardware stiffness and patient mechanics were found to be less important and soft tissue forces, due to inertial protection by the bone mass, were so low that their damage would be unlikely. This simple model provides a basic understanding of how stress waves travel through the impacted system, and an understanding of their relevance to implantation technique and component design.

show abstract

Section: Plos Onementioning

confidence: 73%

Section: Model Limitationsmentioning

confidence: 90%

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Model Limitationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations