Thursday, June 21, 2012

Interface micromotions increase with less-conforming cementless glenoid components - JSES

Interface micromotions increase with less-conforming cementless glenoid components - JSES.

In this in vitro model using 'bone substitute', less conforming glenoid components allowed greater translation, greater rim loading and greater interface micromotion that more conforming glenoid components. 

The clinical relevance of this study is unclear, in that there are a number of pros and cons for different surface geometries. Totally conforming glenohumeral relationships offer greater initial stability through the concavity compression mechanism, but this comes at the expense of limited motion and increase loads on the polyethylene at the constraining rim and increased loads on the component fixation with even minor degrees of translation. Increased degrees of mismatch provide less stability, the possibility of greater translation with eccentric loading of the component, but also may allow greater glenohumeral motion and less interface loads with minor translations.

The interested reader may wish to revisit previous posts on surface mismatch, concavity compression, rocking horse, and glenoid component (see labels at right).


Use the "Search the Blog" box to the right to find other topics of interest to you.

You might like to see the countries from where our visitors come.

You may be interested in some of our most visited web pages including: shoulder arthritis, total shoulderream and runreverse total shoulderCTA arthroplasty, revision surgery for failed shoulder joint replacementrotator cuff disease, and rotator cuff surgery.You may also be interested in our information about quadriceps sparing or 'mini' total knee replacement or about hip replacement arthroplasty.