Explore the vast range of titles available.

With the increasing success of hip joint replacements, the average age of patients has decreased, patients have become more active and their expectations of the implant durability have risen. Thus, pre-clinical endurance tests on hip implants require defining realistic in vivo loads from younger and more active patients. These loads require simplifications to be applicable for simulator tests and numerical analyses. Here, the contact forces in the joint were measured with instrumented hip implants in ten subjects during nine of the most physically demanding and frequent activities of daily living. Typical levels and directions of average and high joint loads were extracted from the intra- and inter-individually widely varying individual data. These data can also be used to analyse bone remodelling at the implant-bone interface, evaluate tissue straining in finite element studies or validate analytical loading predictions, among other uses. The current ISO standards for endurance tests of implant stems and necks are based on historic analytical data from the 1970s. Comparisons of these test forces with in vivo loads unveiled that their unidirectional orientations deviate from the time-dependent in vivo directions during walking and most other activities. The ISO force for testing the stem is substantially too low while the ISO force for the neck better matches typical in vivo magnitudes. Because the magnitudes and orientations of peak forces substantially vary among the activities, load scenarios that reflect a collection of time-dependent high forces should be applied rather than using unidirectional forces. Based on data from ten patients, proposals for the most demanding activities, the time courses of the contact forces and the required cycle numbers for testing are given here. Friction moments in the joint were measured in addition to the contact forces. The moment data were also standardized and can be applied to wear tests of the implant. It was shown that friction only very slightly influences the stresses in the implant neck and shaft.

The loads acting in knee joints must be known for improving joint replacement, surgical procedures, physiotherapy, biomechanical computer simulations, and to advise patients with osteoarthritis or fractures about what activities to avoid. Such data would also allow verification of test standards for knee implants. This work analyzes data from 8 subjects with instrumented knee implants, which allowed measuring the contact forces and moments acting in the joint. The implants were powered inductively and the loads transmitted at radio frequency. The time courses of forces and moments during walking, stair climbing, and 6 more activities were averaged for subjects with I) average body weight and average load levels and II) high body weight and high load levels. During all investigated activities except jogging, the high force levels reached 3,372-4,218N. During slow jogging, they were up to 5,165N. The peak torque around the implant stem during walking was 10.5 Nm, which was higher than during all other activities including jogging. The transverse forces and the moments varied greatly between the subjects, especially during non-cyclic activities. The high load levels measured were mostly above those defined in the wear test ISO 14243. The loads defined in the ISO test standard should be adapted to the levels reported here. The new data will allow realistic investigations and improvements of joint replacement, surgical procedures for tendon repair, treatment of fractures, and others. Computer models of the load conditions in the lower extremities will become more realistic if the new data is used as a gold standard. However, due to the extreme individual variations of some load components, even the reported average load profiles can most likely not explain every failure of an implant or a surgical procedure.

The external knee adduction moment is considered a surrogate measure for the medial tibiofemoral contact force and is commonly used to quantify the load reducing effect of orthopedic interventions. However, only limited and controversial data exist about the correlation between adduction moment and medial force. The objective of this study was to examine whether the adduction moment is indeed a strong predictor for the medial force by determining their correlation during gait. Instrumented knee implants with telemetric data transmission were used to measure tibiofemoral contact forces in nine subjects. Gait analyses were performed simultaneously to the joint load measurements. Skeletal kinematics, as well as the ground reaction forces and inertial parameters, were used as inputs in an inverse dynamics approach to calculate the external knee adduction moment. Linear regression analysis was used to analyze the correlation between adduction moment and medial force for the whole stance phase and separately for the early and late stance phase. Whereas only moderate correlations between adduction moment and medial force were observed throughout the whole stance phase (R(2) = 0.56) and during the late stance phase (R(2) = 0.51), a high correlation was observed at the early stance phase (R(2) = 0.76). Furthermore, the adduction moment was highly correlated to the medial force ratio throughout the whole stance phase (R(2) = 0.75). These results suggest that the adduction moment is a surrogate measure, well-suited to predicting the medial force ratio throughout the whole stance phase or medial force during the early stance phase. However, particularly during the late stance phase, moderate correlations and high inter-individual variations revealed that the predictive value of the adduction moment is limited. Further analyses are necessary to examine whether a combination of other kinematic, kinetic or neuromuscular factors may lead to a more reliable prediction of the force magnitude.

Walking is a task that we seek to understand because it is the most relevant human locomotion. Walking causes complex loading patterns and high load magnitudes within the human body. This work summarizes partially published load data collected in earlier in vivo measurement studies on 9 patients with telemeterized knee endoprostheses, 10 with hip endoprostheses and 5 with vertebral body replacements. Moreover, for the 19 endoprosthesis patients, additional simultaneously measured and previously unreported ground reaction forces are presented. The ground reaction force and the implant forces in the knee and hip exhibited a double peak during each step. The maxima of the ground reaction forces ranged from 100% to 126% bodyweight. In comparison, the greatest implant forces in the hip (249% bodyweight) and knee (271% bodyweight) were much greater. The mean peak force measured in the vertebral body replacement was 39% bodyweight and occurred at different time points of the stance phase. We concluded that walking leads to high load magnitudes in the knee and hip, whereas the forces in the vertebral body replacement remained relatively low. This indicates that the first peak force was greater in the hip than in the knee joint while this was reversed for the second peak force. The forces in the spinal implant were considerably lower than in the knee and hip joints.

It has been suspected that friction in hip implants is higher when walking is initiated after a resting period than during continuous movement. It cannot be excluded that such increased initial moments endanger the cup fixation in the acetabulum, overstress the taper connections in the implant or increase wear. To assess these risks, the contact forces, friction moments and friction coefficients in the joint were measured in vivo in ten subjects. Instrumented hip joint implants with telemetric data transmission were used to access the contact loads between the cup and head during the first steps of walking after a short rest. The analysis demonstrated that the contact force is not increased during the first step. The friction moment in the joint, however, is much higher during the first step than during continuous walking. The moment increases throughout the gait cycle were 32% to 143% on average and up to 621% individually. The high initial moments will probably not increase wear by much in the joint. However, comparisons with literature data on the fixation resistance of the cup against moments made clear that the stability can be endangered. This risk is highest during the first postoperative months for cementless cups with insufficient under-reaming. The high moments after a break can also put taper connections between the head and neck and neck and shaft at a higher risk. During continuous walking, the friction moments individually were extremely varied by factors of 4 to 10. Much of this difference is presumably caused by the varying lubrication properties of the synovia. These large moment variations can possibly lead to friction-induced temperature increases during walking, which are higher than the 43.1°C which have previously been observed in a group of only five subjects.

Knowledge of both tibio-femoral kinematics and kinetics is necessary for fully understanding knee joint biomechanics, guiding implant design and testing, and driving and validating computational models. In 2017, the CAMS-Knee datasets were presented, containing synchronized in vivo implant kinematics measured using a moving fluoroscope and tibio-femoral contact loads measured using instrumented implants from six subjects. However, to date, no representative summary of kinematics and kinetics obtained from measurements at the joint level of the same cohort of subjects exists. In this study, we present the CAMS-Knee standardized subject “Stan”, whose reference data include tibio-femoral kinematics and loading scenarios from all six subjects for level and downhill walking, stair descent, squat and sit-to-stand-to-sit. Using the peak-preserving averaging method by Bergmann and co-workers, we derived scenarios for generally high (CAMS-HIGH100), peak, and extreme loading. The CAMS-HIGH100 axial forces reached peaks between 3022 and 3856 N (3.08–3.93 body weight) for the five investigated activities. Anterior-posterior forces were about a factor of ten lower. The axial moment around the tibia was highest for level walking and squatting with peaks of 9.4 Nm and 10.5 Nm acting externally. Internal tibial rotations of up to 8.4° were observed during squat and sitting, while the walking activities showed approximately half the internal rotation. The CAMS-HIGH100 loads were comparable to Bergmann and co-workers’, but have the additional benefit of synchronized kinematics. Stan’s loads are +11 to +56% higher than the ISO 14243 wear testing standard loads, while the kinematics exhibit markedly different curve shapes. Along with the original CAMS-Knee datasets, Stan’s data can be requested at cams-knee.orthoload.com.

Activities with high spinal loads should be avoided by patients with back problems. Awareness about these activities and knowledge of the associated loads are important for the proper design and pre-clinical testing of spinal implants. The loads on an instrumented vertebral body replacement have been telemetrically measured for approximately 1000 combinations of activities and parameters in 5 patients over a period up to 65 months postoperatively. A database containing, among others, extreme values for load components in more than 13,500 datasets was searched for 10 activities that cause the highest resultant force, bending moment, torsional moment, or shear force in an anatomical direction. The following activities caused high resultant forces: lifting a weight from the ground, forward elevation of straight arms with a weight in hands, moving a weight laterally in front of the body with hanging arms, changing the body position, staircase walking, tying shoes, and upper body flexion. All activities have in common that the center of mass of the upper body was moved anteriorly. Forces up to 1650 N were measured for these activities of daily life. However, there was a large intra- and inter-individual variation in the implant loads for the various activities depending on how exercises were performed. Measured shear forces were usually higher in the posterior direction than in the anterior direction. Activities with high resultant forces usually caused high values of other load components.

During whole body vibrations, the total contact force in knee and hip joints consists of a static component plus the vibration-induced dynamic component. In two different cohorts, these forces were measured with instrumented joint implants at different vibration frequencies and amplitudes. For three standing positions on two platforms, the dynamic forces were compared to the static forces, and the total forces were related to the peak forces during walking. A biomechanical model served for estimating muscle force increases from contact force increases. The median static forces were 122% to 168% (knee), resp. 93% to 141% (hip), of the body weight. The same accelerations produced higher dynamic forces for alternating than for parallel foot movements. The dynamic forces individually differed much between 5.3% to 27.5% of the static forces in the same positions. On the Powerplate, they were even close to zero in some subjects. The total forces were always below 79% of the forces during walking. The dynamic forces did not rise proportionally to platform accelerations. During stance (Galileo, 25 Hz, 2 mm), the damping of dynamic forces was only 8% between foot and knee but 54% between knee and hip. The estimated rises in muscle forces due to the vibrations were in the same ranges as the contact force increases. These rises were much smaller than the vibration-induced EMG increases, reported for the same platform accelerations. These small muscle force increases, along with the observation that the peak contact and muscle forces during vibrations remained far below those during walking, indicate that dynamic muscle force amplitudes cannot be the reason for positive effects of whole body vibrations on muscles, bone remodelling or arthritic joints. Positive effects of vibrations must be caused by factors other than raised forces amplitudes.

Aquatic exercises are widely used for rehabilitation or preventive therapies in order to enable mobilization and muscle strengthening while minimizing joint loading of the lower limb. The load reducing effect of water due to buoyancy is a main advantage compared to exercises on land. However, also drag forces have to be considered that act opposite to the relative motion of the body segments and require higher muscle activity. Due to these opposing effects on joint loading, the load-reducing effect during aquatic exercises remains unknown. The aim of this study was to quantify the joint loads during various aquatic exercises and to determine the load reducing effect of water. Instrumented knee and hip implants with telemetric data transfer were used to measure the resultant joint contact forces in 12 elderly subjects (6x hip, 6x knee) in vivo. Different dynamic, weight-bearing and non-weight-bearing activities were performed by the subjects on land and in chest-high water. Non-weight-bearing hip and knee flexion/extension was performed at different velocities and with additional Aquafins. Joint forces during aquatic exercises ranged between 32 and 396% body weight (BW). Highest forces occurred during dynamic activities, followed by weight-bearing and slow non-weight-bearing activities. Compared to the same activities on land, joint forces were reduced by 36-55% in water with absolute reductions being greater than 100%BW during weight-bearing and dynamic activities. During non-weight-bearing activities, high movement velocities and additional Aquafins increased the joint forces by up to 59% and resulted in joint forces of up to 301%BW. This study confirms the load reducing effect of water during weight-bearing and dynamic exercises. Nevertheless, high drag forces result in increased joint contact forces and indicate greater muscle activity. By the choice of activity, movement velocity and additional resistive devices joint forces can be modulated individually in the course of rehabilitation or preventive therapies.

Loosening of the artificial cup and inlay is the most common reasons for total hip replacement failures. Polyethylene wear and aseptic loosening are frequent reasons. Furthermore, over the past few decades, the population of patients receiving total hip replacements has become younger and more active. Hence, a higher level of activity may include an increased risk of implant loosening as a result of friction-induced wear. In this study, an instrumented hip implant was used to measure the contact forces and friction moments in vivo during walking. Subsequently, the three-dimensional coefficient of friction in vivo was calculated over the whole gait cycle. Measurements were collected from ten subjects at several time points between three and twelve months postoperative. No significant change in the average resultant contact force was observed between three and twelve months postoperative. In contrast, a significant decrease of up to 47% was observed in the friction moment. The coefficient of friction also decreased over postoperative time on average. These changes may be caused by 'running-in' effects of the gliding components or by the improved lubricating properties of the synovia. Because the walking velocity and contact forces were found to be nearly constant during the observed period, the decrease in friction moment suggests an increase in fluid viscosity. The peak values of the contact force individually varied by 32%-44%. The friction moment individually differed much more, by 110%-129% at three and up to 451% at twelve months postoperative. The maximum coefficient of friction showed the highest individual variability, about 100% at three and up to 914% at twelve months after surgery. These individual variations in the friction parameters were most likely due to different 'running-in' effects that were influenced by the individual activity levels and synovia properties.