02.02.2015 Views

Supplementum 3+4/2007 - Společnost pro pojivové tkáně

Supplementum 3+4/2007 - Společnost pro pojivové tkáně

Supplementum 3+4/2007 - Společnost pro pojivové tkáně

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

Fig. 1. The bone remodeling <strong>pro</strong>cess (according to our model) creates cortical and cancellous bone<br />

from the homogeneous density distribution even if only the effect of external forces is considered.<br />

Compare the calculation a) with the Rtg. image b). It is evident that mechanic (dynamic) loading<br />

not only significantly influences the bone remodelling <strong>pro</strong>cess – resorption or formation of bone in<br />

a given element – but also determines the shape, thickness, and emplacement of cortical bone. The<br />

structure of osteons corresponds to the isostress lines c).<br />

tribution mainly around the <strong>pro</strong>sthesis.<br />

In other words, the joint implant creates<br />

a very new condition for natural remodeling<br />

<strong>pro</strong>cesses.<br />

The preliminary numerical simulation<br />

shows that the concentration of the new<br />

bone and the bone elastic constants in the<br />

surroundings of the living bone-implant<br />

interface substantially depend on the history<br />

and intensity of the loading, drug delivery,<br />

and nutrition. The clinical experience<br />

indicates that dynamical loading (above the<br />

threshold level 1500–2500 microstains, e.g.<br />

Frost 1987), especially walking with a characteristic<br />

time period about 1 s, influences<br />

the whole <strong>pro</strong>cess of bone remodeling<br />

after ap<strong>pro</strong>ximately 3 months.<br />

Great unknown in the joint-replacement<br />

<strong>pro</strong>blem is how will the bone respond<br />

in terms of remodelling to new stress-strain<br />

field in bone after the replacement. Usually<br />

there is considerable resorption in the<br />

vicinity of implant (especially in <strong>pro</strong>ximal-<br />

-medial and <strong>pro</strong>ximal-lateral part of femur)<br />

but in some cases there is also a significant<br />

deposition of bone in specific sites that<br />

strengthens the imposition of <strong>pro</strong>sthesis in<br />

bone. Fig. 2 shows one example when adequate<br />

physical activity (50-year-old man at<br />

the time of operation, ap<strong>pro</strong>x. 10 thousand<br />

gaits per day) guarantees sufficient bone<br />

density for a long time (Fig. 2b – the same<br />

man after 6 years from operation).<br />

Our research group tries to give some<br />

insight into this <strong>pro</strong>blematics. Despite the<br />

complexity, when not only person-specific<br />

gene expression together with diet<br />

and activity that he performs but also the<br />

choice of material for <strong>pro</strong>sthesis, angle of<br />

insertion and hollow created plays a role,<br />

the same type of response – the same pattern<br />

of density distribution – after month<br />

from operation is obtained as in clinical<br />

observation – Fig 2c.<br />

ambul_centrum@volny.cz<br />

341

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!