Effect of simplifications of bone and components inclination on the elastohydrodynamic lubrication modeling of metal-on-metal hip resurfacing prosthesis
Restricted accessResearch articleFirst published online May, 2013
Effect of simplifications of bone and components inclination on the elastohydrodynamic lubrication modeling of metal-on-metal hip resurfacing prosthesis
It is important to study the lubrication mechanism of metal-on-metal hip resurfacing prosthesis in order to understand its overall tribological performance, thereby minimize the wear particles. Previous elastohydrodynamic lubrication studies of metal-on-metal hip resurfacing prosthesis neglected the effects of the orientations of the cup and head. Simplified pelvic and femoral bone models were also adopted for the previous studies. These simplifications may lead to unrealistic predictions. For the first time, an elastohydrodynamic lubrication model was developed and solved for a full metal-on-metal hip resurfacing arthroplasty. The effects of the orientations of components and the realistic bones on the lubrication performance of metal-on-metal hip resurfacing prosthesis were investigated by comparing the full model with simplified models. It was found that the orientation of the head played a very important role in the prediction of pressure distributions and film profiles of the metal-on-metal hip resurfacing prosthesis. The inclination of the hemispherical cup up to 45° had no appreciable effect on the lubrication performance of the metal-on-metal hip resurfacing prosthesis. Moreover, the combined effect of material properties and structures of bones was negligible. Future studies should focus on higher inclination angles, smaller coverage angle and microseparation related to the occurrences of edge loading.
AmstutzHCGrigorisPDoreyFJ. Evolution and future of surface replacement of the hip. J Orthop Sci1998; 3: 169–186.
2.
GrigorisPRobertsPPanousisK. Hip resurfacing arthroplasty: the evolution of contemporary designs. Proc IMechE, Part H: J Engineering in Medicine2006; 220: 95–105.
3.
VassitiouKElfickAPDScholesSC. The effect of ‘running-in’ on the tribology and surface morphology of metal-on-metal Birmingham hip resurfacing device in simulator studies. Proc IMechE, Part H: J Engineering in Medicine2006; 220: 269–277.
4.
LeslieIWilliamsSBrownC. Effect of bearing size on the long-term wear, wear debris, and ion levels of large diameter metal-on-metal hip replacements—an in vitro study. J Biomed Mater Res B2008; 87: 163–172.
5.
DowsonDHardakerCFlettM. A hip joint simulator study of the performance of metal-on-metal joints—part 2: design. J Arthroplasty2004; 19: 124–130.
6.
LangtonDJJoyceTJJamesonSS. Adverse reaction to metal debris following hip resurfacing—the influence of component type, orientation and volumetric wear. J Bone Joint Surg Br2011; 93: 164–171.
7.
LordJKLangtonDJNargolAVF. Volumetric wear assessment of failed metal-on-metal hip resurfacing prostheses. Wear2011; 272: 79–87.
8.
MatteiLPuccioFDCiulliE. Wear simulation of metal on metal hip replacements: an analytical approach. In: Proceedings of ASME 2012 11th biennial conference on engineering systems design and analysis, Nantes, France, ASME, Three Park Avenue, New York, USA, 2–4, July, 2012, pp.1–10.
9.
MHRA. Medical Device Alert: ASR™ hip replacement implants manufactured by DePuy International Ltd. Ref: MDA/2010/069, issued: 07September2010.
10.
ClarkeMTLeePTHAroraA. Levels of metal ions after small- and large-diameter metal-on-metal hip arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Br2003; 85: 913–917.
11.
DanielJZiaeeHSalamaA. The effect of the diameter of metal-on-metal bearings on systemic exposure to cobalt and chromium. J Bone Joint Surg Br2006; 88: 443–448.
12.
MoroniASavarinoLCadossiM. Does ion release differ between hip resurfacing and metal-on-metal THA?Clin Orthop Relat R2008; 466: 700–707.
13.
MabilleauGKwonYMPanditH. Metal-on-metal hip resurfacing arthroplasty: a review of periprosthetic biological reactions. Acta Orthop2008; 79: 734–747.
14.
ShettyVDVillarRN. Development and problems of metal-on-metal hip arthroplasty. Proc IMechE, Part H: J Engineering in Medicine2006; 220: 371–377.
15.
Glyn-JonesSPanditHKwonYM. Risk factors for inflammatory pseudotumour formation following hip resurfacing. J Bone Joint Surg Br2009; 91: 1566–1574.
16.
GrammatopoulosGPanditHKwonYM. Hip resurfacings revised for inflammatory pseudotumour have a poor outcome. J Bone Joint Surg Br2009; 91: 1019–1024.
17.
KwonYMGlyn-JonesSSimpsonDJ. Analysis of wear of retrieved metal-on-metal hip resurfacing implants revised due to pseudotumours. J Bone Joint Surg Br2010; 92: 356–361.
18.
KwonY-MOstlereSJMcLardy-SmithP. “Asymptomatic” pseudotumors after metal-on-metal hip resurfacing arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty2011; 26: 511–518.
19.
JinZM. Theoretical studies of elastohydrodynamic lubrication of artificial hip joints. Proc IMechE, Part J: J Engineering Tribology2006; 220: 719–727.
20.
MatteiLDi PuccioFPiccigalloB. Lubrication and wear modelling of artificial hip joints: a review. Tribol Int2011; 44: 532–549.
LiuFJinZMRobertsP. Importance of head diameter, clearance, and cup wall thickness in elastohydrodynamic lubrication analysis of metal-on-metal hip resurfacing prostheses. Proc IMechE, Part H: J Engineering in Medicine2006; 220: 695–704.
23.
MengQELiuFJinZM. Elastohydrodynamic lubrication analysis of metal-on-metal hip implants with complex structures using the finite element method. Proc IMechE, Part J: J Engineering Tribology2010; 224: 1007–1018.
24.
AngadjiARoyleMCollinsSN. Influence of cup orientation on the wear performance of metal-on-metal hip replacements. Proc IMechE, Part H: J Engineering in Medicine2009; 223: 449–457.
25.
De HaanRPattynCGillHS. Correlation between inclination of the acetabular component and metal ion levels in metal-on-metal hip resurfacing replacement. J Bone Joint Surg Br2008; 90: 1291–1297.
26.
HartAJBuddhdevPWinshipP. Cup inclination angle of greater than 50 degrees increases whole blood concentrations of cobalt and chromium ions after metal-on-metal hip resurfacing. Hip Int2008; 18: 212–219.
27.
IsaacGHSchmalzriedTPVailTP. Component mal-position: the ‘Achilles’ heel’ of bearing surfaces in hip replacement. Proc IMechE, Part J: J Engineering Tribology2009; 223: 275–286.
28.
LeslieIJWilliamsSIsaacG. High cup angle and microseparation increase the wear of hip surface replacements. Clin Orthop Relat R2009; 467: 2259–2265.
29.
WilliamsSLeslieIIsaacG. Tribology and wear of metal-on-metal hip prostheses: influence of cup angle and head position. J Bone Joint Surg Am2008; 90: 111–117.
30.
YewAJagatiaMEnsaffH. Analysis of contact mechanics in McKee-Farrar metal-on-metal hip implants. Proc IMechE, Part H: J Engineering in Medicine2003; 217: 333–340.
31.
UdofiaILiuFJinZ. The initial stability and contact mechanics of a press-fit resurfacing arthroplasty of the hip. J Bone Joint Surg Br2007; 89: 549–556.
32.
DalstraMHuiskesRVanerningL. Development and validation of a 3-dimensional finite-element model of the pelvic bone. J Biomech Eng-T ASME1995; 117: 272–278.
33.
LiuFUdofiaIJJinZM. Comparison of contact mechanics between a total hip replacement and a hip resurfacing with a metal-on-metal articulation. Proc IMechE, Part C: J Mechanical Engineering Science2005; 219: 727–732.
34.
FanJMyantCUnderwoodR. Synovial fluid lubrication of artificial joints: protein film formation and composition. Faraday Discuss2012; 156: 69–85.
35.
FanJMyantCWUnderwoodR. Inlet protein aggregation: a new mechanism for lubricating film formation with model synovial fluids. Proc IMechE, Part H: J Engineering in Medicine2011; 225: 696–709.
36.
MyantCUnderwoodRFanJ. Lubrication of metal-on-metal hip joints: the effect of protein content and load on film formation and wear. J Mech Behav Biomed2012; 6: 30–40.
CookeAFDowsonDWrightV. The rheology of synovial fluid and some potential synthetic lubricants for degenerate synovial joints. Eng Med1978; 7: 66–72.
39.
YaoJQLaurentMPJohnsonTS. The influences of lubricant and material on polymer/CoCr sliding friction. Wear2003; 255: 780–784.
40.
BergmannGDeuretzbacherGHellerM. Hip contact forces and gait patterns from routine activities. J Biomech2001; 34: 859–871.
41.
WangFCJinZM. Elastohydrodynamic lubrication modeling of artificial hip joints under steady-state conditions. J Tribol-T ASME2005; 127: 729–739.
42.
LatiniFForteP. Flexibility matrix method applied to the finite element elastohydrodynamic analysis of plain journal bearings. Proc IMechE, Part J: J Engineering Tribology2005; 219: 59–68.
43.
HookeCJ. Special issue on elastohydrodynamic lubrication. Proc IMechE, Part C: J Mechanical Engineering Science2010; 224: I–II.
44.
PiffeteauSSouchetDBonneauD. Influence of thermal and elastic deformations on connecting-rod big end bearing lubrication under dynamic loading. J Tribol-T ASME2000; 122: 181–191.
45.
BonneauDGuinesDFreneJ. EHD analysis, including structural inertia effects and a mass-conserving cavitation model. J Tribol-T ASME1995; 117: 540–547.
46.
LiuFJinZMGrigorisP. Contact mechanics of metal-on-metal hip implants employing a metallic cup with a UHMWPE backing. Proc IMechE, Part H: J Engineering in Medicine2003; 217: 207–213.
47.
WangFCJinZM. Transient elastohydrodynamic lubrication of hip joint implants. J Tribol-T ASME2008; 130: 011007.
48.
BollandBJRFLathamJMWhitwellD. Hip resurfacing. Early failures cause concern. Brit Med J2012; 341: c5632.
49.
FisherJ. Bioengineering reasons for the failure of metal-on-metal hip prostheses: an engineer’s perspective. J Bone Joint Surg Br2011; 93: 1001–1004.
50.
UnderwoodRJZografosASaylesRS. Edge loading in metal-on-metal hips: low clearance is a new risk factor. Proc IMechE, Part H: J Engineering in Medicine2012; 226: 217–226.
51.
XiongSWLinCWangYS. An efficient elastic displacement analysis procedure for simulating transient conformal-contact elastohydrodynamic lubrication systems. J Tribol-T ASME2010; 132: 021502.
