Finite element evaluation of the newest ISO testing standard for polyethylene total knee replacement liners

Abstract

Current treatment for end-stage osteoarthritis is total knee replacement. Given that the number of total knee replacement surgeries is expected to approach 3.48 million by 2030, understanding long-term failure is important. One of the preclinical tests for total knee replacements is carried out using mechanical wear testing under generic walking conditions. Used for this purpose is the International Standards Organization’s generic walking profile. Recently this standard was updated by reversing the direction of anterior/posterior translation and internal/external rotation. The effects of this change have not been investigated, and therefore, it is unknown if comparisons between wear tests utilizing the old and new version of the standard are valid. In this study, we used a finite element model along with a frictional energy–based wear model to compare the kinematic inputs, contact conditions, and wear from the older and newer versions of the ISO standard. Simulator-tested components were used to validate the computational model. We found that there were no visible similarities in the contact conditions between the old and new versions of the standard. The new version of the standard had a lower wear rate but covered a larger portion of the articular surface. Locations of wear also varied considerably. The results of the study suggest that major differences between the old and new standard exist, and therefore, historical wear results should be compared with caution to newly obtained results.

Keywords

Total knee arthroplasty standardized testing finite element modeling/analysis [medical]wear analysis/testing [biomechanics]knee prostheses orthopedic materials

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Cross

Smith

Hoy

et al . The global burden of hip and knee osteoarthritis: estimates from the global burden of disease 2010 study. Ann Rheum Dis 2014; 73: 1323–1330.

Kurtz

Ong

Lau

et al . Projections of primary and revision hip and knee arthroplasty in the United States from 2005 to 2030. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2007; 89: 780–785.

Naudie

DDR

Ammeen

Engh

et al . Wear and osteolysis around total knee arthroplasty. J Am Acad Orthop Surg 2007; 15: 53–64.

Sharkey

Hozack

Rothman

et al . Insall Award paper. Why are total knee arthroplasties failing today? Clin Orthop Relat Res 2002; 404: 7–13.

Gupta

Chu

Ranawat

et al . Osteolysis after total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 2007; 22: 787–799.

Lachiewicz

PF.

Are the relative indications for revision total knee arthroplasty changing?

J Surg Orthop Adv 2009; 18: 74–76.

Gallo

Goodman

Konttinen

et al . Osteolysis around total knee arthroplasty: a review of pathogenetic mechanisms. Acta Biomater 2013; 9: 8046–8058.

Bozic

Kurtz

Lau

et al . The epidemiology of revision total knee arthroplasty in the United States. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2010; 468: 45–51.

Knight

Pal

Coleman

et al . Comparison of long-term numerical and experimental total knee replacement wear during simulated gait loading. J Biomech 2007; 40: 1550–1558.

10.

ISO 14243-3:2014. Implants for surgery—wear of total knee-joint prostheses—part 3: loading and displacement parameters for wear-testing machines with displacement control and corresponding environmental conditions for test.

11.

Ngai

Wimmer

MA.

Kinematic evaluation of cruciate-retaining total knee replacement patients during level walking: a comparison with the displacement-controlled ISO standard. J Biomech 2009; 42: 2363–2368.

12.

Ngai

Schwenke

Wimmer

MA.

In-vivo kinematics of knee prostheses patients during level walking compared with the ISO force-controlled simulator standard. Proc IMechE, Part H: J Engineering in Medicine 2009; 223: 889–896.

13.

Sutton

Werner

Haider

et al . In vitro response of the natural cadaver knee to the loading profiles specified in a standard for knee implant wear testing. J Biomech 2010; 43: 2203–2207.

14.

Schwenke

Wimmer

MA.

Cross-shear in metal-on-polyethylene articulation of orthopaedic implants and its relationship to wear. Wear 2013; 301: 168–174.

15.

ISO 14243-3:2004. Implants for surgery—wear of total knee-joint prostheses—part 3: loading and displacement parameters for wear-testing machines with displacement control and corresponding environmental conditions for test.

16.

Bergström

Kurtz

Rimnac

et al . Constitutive modeling of ultra-high molecular weight polyethylene under large-deformation and cyclic loading conditions. Biomaterials 2002; 23: 2329–2343.

17.

O’Brien

Bohm

Petrak

et al . An energy dissipation and cross shear time dependent computational wear model for the analysis of polyethylene wear in total knee replacements. J Biomech 2014; 47: 1127–1133.

18.

Godest

Beaugonin

Haug

et al . Simulation of a knee joint replacement during a gait cycle using explicit finite element analysis. J Biomech 2002; 35: 267–275.

19.

Halloran

Petrella

Rullkoetter

PJ.

Explicit finite element modeling of total knee replacement mechanics. J Biomech 2005; 38: 323–331.

20.

O’Brien

Luo

et al . Computational development of a polyethylene wear model for the articular and backside surfaces in modular total knee replacements. Tribol Int 2013; 59: 284–291.

21.

Dassault Systémes. Modeling Contact with Abaqus/Standard 6.14 Course Manual, 2014.

22.

Knowlton

Wimmer

MA.

An autonomous mathematical reconstruction to effectively measure volume loss on retrieved polyethylene tibial inserts. J Biomed Mater Res B Appl Biomater 2013; 101: 449–457.

23.

Strickland

Taylor

In-silico wear prediction for knee replacements—methodology and corroboration. J Biomech 2009; 42: 1469–1474.

24.

Brockett

Abdelgaied

Haythornthwaite

et al . The influence of simulator input conditions on the wear of total knee replacements: an experimental and computational study. Proc IMechE, Part H: J Engineering in Medicine 2016; 230: 429–439.

25.

Cottrell

Babalola

Furman

et al . Stair ascent kinematics affect UHMWPE wear and damage in total knee replacements. J Biomed Mater Res B Appl Biomater 2006; 78: 15–19.

26.

Popoola

Yao

Johnson

et al . Wear, delamination, and fatigue resistance of melt-annealed highly crosslinked UHMWPE cruciate-retaining knee inserts under activities of daily living. J Orthop Res 2010; 28: 1120–1126.

27.

Johnson

Laurent

Yao

et al . Comparison of wear of mobile and fixed bearing knees tested in a knee simulator. Wear 2003; 255: 1107–1112.

28.

Muratoglu

Rubash

Bragdon

et al . Simulated normal gait wear testing of a highly cross-linked polyethylene tibial insert. J Arthroplasty 2007; 22: 435–444.

29.

Freed

Simon

Knowlton

et al . Are instrumented knee forces representative of a larger population of cruciate-retaining total knee arthroplasties? J Arthroplasty 2017; 32(7): 2268–2273.

30.

Moslemi Rad

. Volumetric wear assessment and characterization of striated pattern of retrieved UHMWPE tibial inserts. Masters’ Thesis, University of Illinois at Chicago, Chicago, IL, 2015.