Does stress shielding after radial head arthroplasty affect functional outcomes?

Experimental Analysis of Stress Shielding Effects in Screw Spacers Placed in Porcine Spinal Tissue

Bone cortical tissues reorganize and remodel in response to tensile forces acting on them, while compressive forces cause atrophy. However, implants support most of the payload. Bones do not regenerate, and stress shielding occurs. The aim is to analyze the biomechanical behavior of a lumbar cage to study the implant's stress shielding. The ASTM E-9 standard was used with the necessary adjustments to perform compression tests on lumbar and thoracic porcine spinal vertebrae. Twelve cases were analyzed: six with the metal prosthesis and six with the PEEK implant. A mathematical model based on the Hertz contact theory is proposed to assess the stress shielding for endoprosthesis used in spine pathologies. The lumbar spacer (screw) helps to reduce the stress shielding effect due to the ACME thread. The best interspinous spacer is the PEEK screw. It does not embed in bone. The deformation capability increases by 11.5% and supports 78.6 kg more than a system without any interspinous spacer.

Stress shielding following radial head arthroplasty: the impact of preoperative bone quality

BACKGROUND

We sought to assess if the medullary diameter to cortical width ratio (MD:CW), canal flair index (CFI), and canal fill (CF) of the proximal radius were associated with the presence of stress shielding (SS) after a MoPyC radial head arthroplasty.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We conducted a retrospective, international, multicenter (4 centers) study. A total of 100 radial head arthroplasties in 64 women and 36 men with a mean age of 58.40 years ± 14.90 (range, 25.00-91.00) were included. Radiographic measurements, including MD:CW, CFI, CF, and postoperative SS were captured at a mean follow-up of 3.9 years ± 2.8 (range, 0.5-11).

RESULTS

SS was identified in 60 patients. Mean preoperative MD:CW, CFI, and CF were 0.55 ± 0.09, 1.05 ± 0.18, and 0.79 ± 0.11, respectively. The presence of SS was significantly associated with MD:CW (adjusted odds ratio = 13.66; P = .001), and expansion of the stem (adjusted odds ratio = 3.78; P = .001). The amount of the SS was significantly correlated with expansion of the stem (aβ 4.58; P < .001).

CONCLUSIONS

Our study found that MD:CW was an independent risk factor of SS after MoPyc radial head arthroplasty. Autoexpansion of the MoPyc stem significantly increased the risk of SS and its extent. Further studies involving multiple implants designs are needed to confirm the preliminary observations presented in the current study.

Stress Shielding around Press-Fit Radial Head Arthroplasty: Proposal for a New Classification System Based on the Analysis of 97 Patients with a Mid-Term Follow-Up and a Review of the Literature

Stress shielding (SS) around press-fit radial head arthroplasty (RHA) was recently reported as a cause of a new type of proximal radial neck resorption (PRNR). Very few studies have analyzed this phenomenon. No comprehensive classification is currently available. We thus decided to clinically and radiographically analyze 97 patients who underwent a press-fit RHA and who were followed up for a mean period of 72 months (range: 2-14 years). PRNR in the four quadrants of the radial neck was assessed. We designed a novel SS classification based on (1) the degree of resorption of the length of the radial neck and (2) the number of neck quadrants involved on the axial plane. The mean PRNR (mPRNR) was calculated as the mean resorption in the four quadrants. mPRNR was classified as mild (<3 mm), moderate (3 to 6 mm), and severe (>6 mm). Eighty-four percent of the patients presented PRNR. mPRNR was mild in 33% of the patients, moderate in 54%, and severe in 13%. In total, 6% of the patients with mild mPRNR displayed resorption in one quadrant, 18% displayed resorption in two quadrants, 4% displayed resorption in three quadrants, and 72% displayed resorption in four quadrants. All four quadrants were always involved in moderate or severe mPRNR, with no significant differences being detected between quadrants (p = 0.568). mPRNR has no apparent effect on the clinical results, complications, or RHA survival in the medium term. However, longer-term studies are needed to determine the effects of varying degrees of PRNR on implant failure.

Radial head replacement with the 3D-printed patient-specific titanium prosthesis: Preliminary results of a multi-centric prospective study

PURPOSE

To report preliminary clinical results and safety of 3D-printed patient-specific titanium radial head (RH) prosthesis in treatment of the irreparable RH fractures.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

This multi-centric prospective study included 10 patients (6 men and four women, mean age 41 years (range, 25-64 years)). Three cases were classified as Mason type III and 7 cases as type IV. Patients were assessed preoperatively, intraoperatively, and at 1, 6, 12, 24, 36, and 48 weeks postoperatively. Range of motion (ROM), visual analog scale (VAS) score, Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH) score, Mayo Elbow Performance Score (MEPS), radiology imaging, and laboratory blood and urine testing were evaluated.

RESULTS

The prostheses were implanted utilizing cemented stems in 5 patients and cementless stems in 5 patients. Intraoperatively, well congruency of a prosthesis with capitellum and radial notch of ulna was observed in all cases. All patients had improvement of ROM, VAS score, DASH score, and MEPS during the postoperative follow-ups. At the final follow-up, mean elbow extension was 6.5° (range, 0°-30°), flexion 145° (range, 125°-150°), supination 79° (range, 70°-80°), and pronation 73.5° (range, 45°-80°). Mean VAS score was 0.3 (range, 0-3), DASH score was 12.35 (range, 1.7-23.3), and MEPS was 99.5 (range, 95-100). Postoperative radiographs demonstrated heterotopic ossification in 2 cases, periprosthetic radiolucency in 2 cases, and proximal radial neck resorption in 2 cases. No one had the evidence of capitellar erosion, implant failure, malpositioning, overstuffing, or symptomatic stem loosening. There was no significant alteration of laboratory results or adverse events related to the 3D-printed prosthesis implantation.

CONCLUSION

The preliminary results demonstrated that implantation of the 3D-printed patient-specific titanium RH prosthesis is safe and may be a potential treatment option for irreparable RH fracture.