Advertisement for orthosearch.org.uk
Results 1 - 2 of 2
Results per page:
Bone & Joint Research
Vol. 9, Issue 7 | Pages 386 - 393
1 Jul 2020
Doyle R van Arkel RJ Muirhead-Allwood S Jeffers JRT

Aims. Cementless acetabular components rely on press-fit fixation for initial stability. In certain cases, initial stability is more difficult to obtain (such as during revision). No current study evaluates how a surgeon’s impaction technique (mallet mass, mallet velocity, and number of strikes) may affect component fixation. This study seeks to answer the following research questions: 1) how does impaction technique affect a) bone strain generation and deterioration (and hence implant stability) and b) seating in different density bones?; and 2) can an impaction technique be recommended to minimize risk of implant loosening while ensuring seating of the acetabular component?. Methods. A custom drop tower was used to simulate surgical strikes seating acetabular components into synthetic bone. Strike velocity and drop mass were varied. Synthetic bone strain was measured using strain gauges and stability was assessed via push-out tests. Polar gap was measured using optical trackers. Results. A phenomenon of strain deterioration was identified if an excessive number of strikes was used to seat a component. This effect was most pronounced in low-density bone at high strike velocities. Polar gap was reduced with increasing strike mass and velocity. Conclusion. A high mallet mass with low strike velocity resulted in satisfactory implant stability and polar gap, while minimizing the risk of losing stability due to over-striking. Extreme caution not to over-strike must be exercised when using high velocity strikes in low-density bone for any mallet mass. Cite this article: Bone Joint Res 2020;9(7):386–393


Bone & Joint Research
Vol. 9, Issue 9 | Pages 534 - 542
1 Sep 2020
Varga P Inzana JA Fletcher JWA Hofmann-Fliri L Runer A Südkamp NP Windolf M

Aims. Fixation of osteoporotic proximal humerus fractures remains challenging even with state-of-the-art locking plates. Despite the demonstrated biomechanical benefit of screw tip augmentation with bone cement, the clinical findings have remained unclear, potentially as the optimal augmentation combinations are unknown. The aim of this study was to systematically evaluate the biomechanical benefits of the augmentation options in a humeral locking plate using finite element analysis (FEA). Methods. A total of 64 cement augmentation configurations were analyzed using six screws of a locking plate to virtually fix unstable three-part fractures in 24 low-density proximal humerus models under three physiological loading cases (4,608 simulations). The biomechanical benefit of augmentation was evaluated through an established FEA methodology using the average peri-screw bone strain as a validated predictor of cyclic cut-out failure. Results. The biomechanical benefit was already significant with a single cemented screw and increased with the number of augmented screws, but the configuration was highly influential. The best two-screw (mean 23%, SD 3% reduction) and the worst four-screw (mean 22%, SD 5%) combinations performed similarly. The largest benefits were achieved with augmenting screws purchasing into the calcar and having posteriorly located tips. Local bone mineral density was not directly related to the improvement. Conclusion. The number and configuration of cemented screws strongly determined how augmentation can alleviate the predicted risk of cut-out failure. Screws purchasing in the calcar and posterior humeral head regions may be prioritized. Although requiring clinical corroborations, these findings may explain the controversial results of previous clinical studies not controlling the choices of screw augmentation