Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-d8cs5 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-02-10T01:57:01.267Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Two Ultrasonic Techniques to Evaluate Bone Remodeling About Femoral Prostheses

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  26 February 2011

Mark C. Zimmerman ,
Alain Meunier ,
Pascal Christel ,
Laurent Sedel  and
J. Lawrence Katz
Mark C. Zimmerman
Affiliation:
University of Medicine and Dentistry of New Jersey, Dept. of Orthopaedic Surgery, Newark, NJ 07103
Alain Meunier
Affiliation:
University of Medicine and Dentistry of New Jersey, Dept. of Orthopaedic Surgery, Newark, NJ 07103
Pascal Christel
Affiliation:
Laboratoire de Recherches Orthopediques-Faculte de Medecine, Lariboisiere-St. Louis, 75010, Paris. France
Laurent Sedel
Affiliation:
Laboratoire de Recherches Orthopediques-Faculte de Medecine, Lariboisiere-St. Louis, 75010, Paris. France
J. Lawrence Katz
Affiliation:
Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Dept. of Biomedical Engineering, Troy, NY 12180
Get access

Extract

Ultrasonic techniques have been used extensively to measure the anisotropic elastic properties of calcified tissue [1–4]. Yoon and Katz [3] have derived the equations relating the elastic constants to the technical moduli: Young's modulus, shear modulus, and the bulk modulus. In order to make these calculations they assumed that bone was transversely isotropic (hexagonally symmetric). Abendschein and Hyatt [1] demonstrated that there was a good correlation between the longitudinal modulus (E3) of bone experimentally measured with ultrasound and mechanical techniques. Some investigators have even used these techniques to determine the different mechanical properties of pathological bone (osteopetrotic, osteoporotic) [4].

Type
Research Article
Information
MRS Online Proceedings Library (OPL) , Volume 110: Symposium M – Biomedical Materials and Devices , 1987 , 517
Copyright
Copyright © Materials Research Society 1988

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1. Abendschein, W. and Hyatt, G.W., Ultrasonic and Selected Physical Properties of Bone. Clin. Orthop. 69:294–301, (1970).Google Scholar
2. Buskirk, W.C.Van and Ashman, R.B., The Elastic Moduli of Bone, edited by Buskirk, W.C.Van and Woo, S.L.-Y., New York, ASME, (Publ., AMD-Vol. 45, 1981), pp. 131–143.Google Scholar
3. Yoon, H.S. and Katz, J.L., Ultrasonic Wave Propagation in Human Cortical Bone. Theoretical Considerations for Hexagonal Symmetry. J. Biomechanics 9:407–412, (1976).Google Scholar
4. Meunier, A., Yoon, H.S., Katz, J.L., Christel, P., and Vosburgh, F., Ultrasonic Characterization of Some Pathological Human Femora, In I.E.E.E. Ultrasonic Symposium, San Diego, CA, 1982, pp713–717.Google Scholar
5. Bocco, F., Langan, P. and Charnley, J., Changes in the Calcar Femoris in Relation to Cement Technology in Total Hip Replacement. Clin. Orthop. 128:287–295, (1977).Google Scholar
6. Kuswetter, H., Gabriel, E., Stuhler, T. and Topfer, L., Remodelling of the femur in conventionally-implanted hip prostheses. In The Cementless Fixation of Hip Endoprostheses, ed. by Morscher, E., New York, (Springer Verlag, 1984), pp 17–20.Google Scholar
7. Hoffman, A.A., Bigler, G. I., France, E.P., Daniels, A.U., Wyatt, R. and Hess, W.E., Increased Endosteal Bone Loss After Hip Arthroplasty. In: Trans of the Orthop. Res. Soc., New Orleans, Louisiana, Feb. 17–20, 1986, pp 470.Google Scholar
8. Murphy, S. B, Walker, P.S. and Schiller, A.L., Adaptative Changes in the Femur After Implantation of an Austin Moore Prosthesis., J. Bone Jt. Surg. 66:A, 43: 443, (1984).Google Scholar
9. Sutherland, C.J., Wilde, A.H., Borden, L.S., and Marks, K.E., A Ten Year Follow-up of One Hundred Consecutive Muller Curved-Stem Total Hip- Replacement Arthroplasties. J.Bone Jt. Surg. 64–A. 7: 970–982, (1982)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
10. Stauffer, R.N., Ten-year Follow up Study of Total Hip Replacement. J. Bone Jt. Surg. 64–A 7:983–990, (1982).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
11. Charmley, J., Prosthetic Fixation and Loosening. In: Third Annual Meeting of Soc. on Biomaterials, New Orleans, LA, (1977).Google Scholar
12. Tonino, A.J., Davidson, C.L., Klopper, P.J. and Linclau, L A, Protection From Stress In Bone and Its Effects. J. Bone Jt. Surg. 58–B. 1:107, (1976).Google Scholar