Cemented Femoral Component Surface Finish Mechanics
Roy
D. Crowninshield, Ph.D.; Jack D. Jennings, B.S.;
Michel L. Laurent, Ph.D.; and William J.
Maloney, M.D. Research and Development Zimmer, Inc Warsaw, Indiana A cemented femoral component’s surface finish may influence implant
function through variations in cement adhesion and abrasion properties. Morphologic characterization of historic
and current femoral hip prosthesis surface finishes show greater than x20 range
in implant roughness. Early implants
typically had relatively smooth surfaces, whereas many of the more recent
implants have rougher surface finishes.
Smoother implant surfaces have lower cement-metal interface fixation
strength, whereas rougher surfaces have greater fixation strength. With interface motion, the smoother
surfaces are less abrasive of bone cement, whereas rougher implant surfaces
are more abrasive. Because of
enhanced bone cement attachment, rougher implant surfaces may have a lower
probability of interface motion, while at the same time, a higher debris
generation consequence if motion occurs.
In contrast, smoother implant surfaces may have a higher probability
of interface motion with a lower debris generating consequence of that
motion. The prolonged use of cemented
total hip replacement may be approached by either extending the duration of
implant function after cement-metal interface loosening with smooth surfaced
implants or, in contrast, by extending the duration of cement-metal interface
adhesion with rougher surfaced implants. Shiny/Smooth vs.
Rough/Textured Femoral Component Surface Finish:
|
Previous Lecture 
Index Next
Lecture