Extensive bone defects of the proximal femur e.g. due to aseptic loosening might require the implantation of megaprostheses. In the literature high loosening rates of such megaprostheses have been reported. However, different fixation methods have been developed to achieve adequate implant stability, which is reflected by differing design characteristics of the commonly used implants. Yet, a biomechanical comparison of these designs has not been reported. The aim of our study was to analyse potential differences in the biomechanical behaviour of three megaprostheses with different designs by measuring the primary rotational stability in vitro. Four different stem designs [Group A: Megasystem-C® (Link), Group B: MUTARS®(Implantcast), Group C: GMRS™ (Stryker) and Group D: Segmental System (Zimmer); see Fig. 1] were implanted into 16 Sawbones® after generating a segmental AAOS Typ 2 defect. Using an established method to analyse the rotational stability, a cyclic axial torque of ± 7.0 Nm along the longitudinal stem axis was applied. Micromotions were measured at defined levels of the bone and the implant [Fig. 2]. The calculation of relative micromotions at the bone-implant interface allowed classifying the rotational implant stability.Introduction:
Methods:
