Advertisement for orthosearch.org.uk
Results 1 - 6 of 6
Results per page:
Bone & Joint Research
Vol. 10, Issue 8 | Pages 488 - 497
10 Aug 2021
Cleemann R Sorensen M West A Soballe K Bechtold JE Baas J

Aims

We wanted to evaluate the effects of a bone anabolic agent (bone morphogenetic protein 2 (BMP-2)) on an anti-catabolic background (systemic or local zoledronate) on fixation of allografted revision implants.

Methods

An established allografted revision protocol was implemented bilaterally into the stifle joints of 24 canines. At revision surgery, each animal received one BMP-2 (5 µg) functionalized implant, and one raw implant. One group (12 animals) received bone graft impregnated with zoledronate (0.005 mg/ml) before impaction. The other group (12 animals) received untreated bone graft and systemic zoledronate (0.1 mg/kg) ten and 20 days after revision surgery. Animals were observed for an additional four weeks before euthanasia.


Bone & Joint Open
Vol. 1, Issue 10 | Pages 653 - 662
20 Oct 2020
Rahman L Ibrahim MS Somerville L Teeter MG Naudie DD McCalden RW

Aims

To compare the in vivo long-term fixation achieved by two acetabular components with different porous ingrowth surfaces using radiostereometric analysis (RSA).

Methods

This was a minimum ten-year follow-up of a prospective randomized trial of 62 hips with two different porous ingrowth acetabular components. RSA exams had previously been acquired through two years of follow-up. Patients returned for RSA examination at a minimum of ten years. In addition, radiological appearance of these acetabular components was analyzed, and patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) obtained.


Bone & Joint Research
Vol. 8, Issue 6 | Pages 253 - 254
1 Jun 2019
de Steiger R


Bone & Joint Research
Vol. 8, Issue 6 | Pages 246 - 252
1 Jun 2019
Liddle A Webb M Clement N Green S Liddle J German M Holland J

Objectives. Previous studies have evidenced cement-in-cement techniques as reliable in revision arthroplasty. Commonly, the original cement mantle is reshaped, aiding accurate placement of the new stem. Ultrasonic devices selectively remove cement, preserve host bone, and have lower cortical perforation rates than other techniques. As far as the authors are aware, the impact of ultrasonic devices on final cement-in-cement bonds has not been investigated. This study assessed the impact of cement removal using the Orthosonics System for Cemented Arthroplasty Revision (OSCAR; Orthosonics) on final cement-in-cement bonds. Methods. A total of 24 specimens were manufactured by pouring cement (Simplex P Bone Cement; Stryker) into stainless steel moulds, with a central rod polished to Stryker Exeter V40 specifications. After cement curing, the rods were removed and eight specimens were allocated to each of three internal surface preparation groups: 1) burr; 2) OSCAR; and 3) no treatment. Internal holes were recemented, and each specimen was cut into 5 mm discs. Shear testing of discs was completed by a technician blinded to the original grouping, recording ultimate shear strengths. Scanning electron microscopy (SEM) was completed, inspecting surfaces of shear-tested specimens. Results. The mean shear strength for OSCAR-prepared specimens (33.6 MPa) was significantly lower than for the control (46.3 MPa) and burr (45.8 MPa) groups (p < 0.001; one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) with Tukey’s post hoc analysis). There was no significant difference in shear strengths between control and burr groups (p = 0.57). Scanning electron microscopy of OSCAR specimens revealed evidence of porosity undiscovered in previous studies. Conclusion. Results show that the cement removal technique impacts on final cement-in-cement bonds. This in vitro study demonstrates significantly weaker bonds when using OSCAR prior to recementation into an old cement mantle compared with cement prepared with a burr or no treatment. This infers that care must be taken in surgical decision-making regarding cement removal techniques used during cement-in-cement revision arthroplasty, suggesting that the risks and benefits of ultrasonic cement removal need consideration. Cite this article: A. Liddle, M. Webb, N. Clement, S. Green, J. Liddle, M. German, J. Holland. Ultrasonic cement removal in cement-in-cement revision total hip arthroplasty: What is the effect on the final cement-in-cement bond? Bone Joint Res 2019;8:246–252. DOI: 10.1302/2046-3758.86.BJR-2018-0313.R1


Bone & Joint Research
Vol. 7, Issue 5 | Pages 357 - 361
1 May 2018
Shin T Lim D Kim YS Kim SC Jo WL Lim YW

Objectives

Laser-engineered net shaping (LENS) of coated surfaces can overcome the limitations of conventional coating technologies. We compared the in vitro biological response with a titanium plasma spray (TPS)-coated titanium alloy (Ti6Al4V) surface with that of a Ti6Al4V surface coated with titanium using direct metal fabrication (DMF) with 3D printing technologies.

Methods

The in vitro ability of human osteoblasts to adhere to TPS-coated Ti6Al4V was compared with DMF-coating. Scanning electron microscopy (SEM) was used to assess the structure and morphology of the surfaces. Biological and morphological responses to human osteoblast cell lines were then examined by measuring cell proliferation, alkaline phosphatase activity, actin filaments, and RUNX2 gene expression.


Bone & Joint 360
Vol. 2, Issue 6 | Pages 34 - 36
1 Dec 2013

The December 2013 Research Roundup360 looks at: Inflammation implicated in FAI; Ponseti and effective teaching; Unicompartmental knee design and tibial strain; Bisphosphonates and fracture healing; Antibiosis in cement; Zoledronic acid improves primary stability in revision?; Osteoporotic fractures revisited; and electroarthrography for monitoring of cartilage degeneration