This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) Submit a response Alert me when this article is cited Alert me when eLetters are posted Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal My Folders Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via ISI Web of Science (2) Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Skurla, C. P. Articles by James, S. P. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Skurla, C. P. Articles by James, S. P.

Assessing the dog as a model for human total hip replacement

ANALYSIS OF 38 CANINE CEMENTED FEMORAL COMPONENTS RETRIEVED AT POST-MORTEM

¹ Department of Engineering, Baylor University, P O Box 97356, Waco, Texas 76798-7356, USA.
² Department of Small Animal Clinical Sciences, College of Veterinary Medicine, C352 Veterinary Medical Centre, University of Minnesota, St Paul, Minnesota 55108, USA.
³ Department of Clinical Sciences
⁴ 5532 Continental Drive, Fort Collins, Colorado 80526, USA.
⁵ Department of Mechanical Engineering, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, Colorado 80523-1374, USA.

Correspondence should be sent to Dr C. P. Skurla.

Post-mortem retrieval of canine, cemented femoral components was analysed to assess the performance of these implants in the dog as a model for human total hip replacement (THR). Mechanical testing and radiological analysis were performed to determine the stability of the implant and the quality of the cement. Thirty-eight implants from 29 dogs were retrieved after time intervals ranging from 0.67 to 11.67 years. The incidence of aseptic loosening was 63.2%, much higher than in human patients (6% in post-mortem studies). Failure of the femoral implants began with debonding at the cement-metal interface, similar to that in implants in man. The incidence of aseptic loosening was much lower in bilateral than in unilateral implants. Significant differences were observed for three different designs of implant. While the dog remains the animal model of choice for THR, results from this study provide insight into interspecies differences in the performance of implants. For example, the performance of THR in dogs should be compared with that in young rather than in elderly human patients.