Friction properties at the bone-metal interface: Comparison of four different porous metal surfaces

Detailed friction load-displacement response of four distinct metallic surfaces [one beaded porous metal (CTR) and three cast Co-Cr alloy ingrowth mesh surfaces, nonplanar mesh (INX), cast mesh 1 (CM1), and cast mesh 2 (CM2)] on polyurethane and cancellous bone specimens of six tibiae were measured under different normal stresses (0.1, 0.15, or 0.025 MPa). Bone cubes were obtained from different proximal regions of resurfaced cadaveric tibiae. Both monotonic and cyclic fatigue loadings of up to 4000 cycles at 1 Hz were considered. Comparison of measured results indicated that the friction coefficient was not affected by the magnitude of normal stress and the bone excision site (medial, lateral, anterior, posterior, and central). The CM2 surface showed significantly greater resistance with friction coefficients of more than 0.9 for the bone and 0.8 for the polyurethane. The INX surface yielded the second largest resistance followed by CM1 and CTR surfaces. No significant difference was found between these latter two surfaces. Fatigue tests of up to 4000 loading-unloading cycles showed about 10% reduction in friction coefficient for CTR and INX surfaces, while negligible reduction was found for CM1 and CM2 surfaces.; Detailed friction load-displacement response of four distinct metallic surfaces [one beaded porous metal (CTR) and three cast Co-Cr alloy ingrowth mesh surfaces, nonplanar mesh (INX), cast mesh 1 (CM1), and cast mesh 2 (CM2)] on polyurethane and cancellous bone specimens of six tibiae were measured under different normal stresses (0.1, 0.15, or 0.025 MPa). Bone cubes were obtained from different proximal regions of resurfaced cadaveric tibiae. Both monotonic and cyclic fatigue loadings of up to 4000 cycles at 1 Hz were considered. Comparison of measured results indicated that the friction coefficient was not affected by the magnitude of normal stress and the bone excision site (medial, lateral, anterior, posterior, and central). The CM2 surface showed significantly greater resistance with friction coefficients of more than 0.9 for the bone and 0.8 for the polyurethane. The INX surface yielded the second largest resistance followed by CM1 and CTR surfaces. No significant difference was found between these latter two surfaces. Fatigue tests of up to 4000 loading-unloading cycles showed about 10% reduction in friction coefficient for CTR and INX surfaces, while negligible reduction was found for CM1 and CM2 surfaces.