Advertisement for orthosearch.org.uk
Results 1 - 2 of 2
Results per page:
Applied filters
General Orthopaedics

Include Proceedings
Dates
Year From

Year To
Orthopaedic Proceedings
Vol. 98-B, Issue SUPP_8 | Pages 72 - 72
1 May 2016
Juszczyk M de Uhlenbrock A Kelnberger A Heinrich W
Full Access

Introduction

Failure of the polyethylene glenoid component is the most common complication of Total Shoulder Arthroplasty (TSA) and accounts for a majority of the unsatisfactory results after this procedure. Nowadays, most of the shoulder prostheses consist of metal on polyethylene bearing components. Repetitive contact between the metal ball and the polyethylene socket produces progressive abrasion of the implant if the moving part is made of polyethylene. Its debris may then lead to an active osteolysis and implant loosening. Failure of the glenoid component is often manifested clinically by pain, loss of function, and the presence of a clunking noise and leads to revision surgery.

The use of ceramic balls aims at the reduction of this phenomenon. In many studies regarding knee and hip replacement it has been shown that the use of ceramic on polyethylene (CoP) is more beneficial in terms of polyethylene wear and failure, when compared to metal on polyethylene (MoP).

Since a human shoulder is very different from a hip and a knee, it is not a self-centering, neither congruent joint. And its stability is provided by healthy muscles of the rotator cuff. We decided to compare CoP against MoP in semi- force controlled test setup. Where, for a given governing angular motion the translational motion was a function of contact (frictional) forces between the tested couple (humeral head and PE).

This is to our knowledge the first study to address in direct comparison wear in TSA in semi force controlled test setup.

Materials and methods

Up today, there is no test standard for wear testing of TSA. A customised joint simulator was used to create worst-case scenario motion allowing for simulation of the muscles in two perpendicular axes: inferior – superior (I-S) and anterior – posterior (A-P). Were a governing angular motion (GAM) was the abduction – adduction (±30°) in I-S. A system of springs was created so that the I-S translation and the A-P rotation were a result of the GAM. The stiffens of the springs was tuned based on the MoP pair initial kinematic (1000 cycles) to result in: about 2mm I-S translation, and about ±10° A-P rotation.

All samples were tested at the same test station in order to obtain maximal repeatability. Axial load was in range of 100N to 750 N.

Three articulating couples for each material were tested for total of 2M cycles. Standard midterm gravimetric measurements were conducted at each 0.5 M cycles.


Orthopaedic Proceedings
Vol. 98-B, Issue SUPP_7 | Pages 1 - 1
1 May 2016
Murray R Juszczyk M Frankle M Uhlenbrock A Kelnberger A Heinrich W
Full Access

A secure taper connection in shoulder arthroplasty is mandatory to avoid loosening and fretting. This study's objective was to determine the amount of in situ force used by surgeons to seat a humeral head and to determine the disengagement force of the taper connection. The influence of 1) material type, 2) head size, and 3) surgeon on the impaction force and the fixation (pulloff force) of the sample was examined.

Methods

Impaction data was collected from experienced shoulder surgeons (n=5) during a cadaver lab. Testing groups (n=5 each) were: 1) small ceramic, 2) big ceramic, 3)small metal and 4) large metal. Twenty centric, anatomic humeral heads (DJO surgical, Vista, CA, TURONTM, material: CoCrMo or BIOLOX®delta, size: 38×14mm or 54×22mm) were paired with a corresponding humeral neck (TURON™, DJO surgical, type: neutral modular, material: CoCrMo). Each taper was always used with the same humeral head throughout testing.

The impaction force sequence was recorded using an instrumented impactor (Piezo sensor, model 208 C05, PCB PIEZOTRONICSINC, Depew, NY, ±1%). The surgeons impacted all samples into the cadaver using their typical pattern of hammer strikes (Figure 1). The engaged humeral head and taper were removed by hand and then disengaged using an instrumented (U93, HBM, Darmstadt, Germany, load limit: 5kN) hand-held pulloff-device.

Statistics and data analysis were performed in MATLAB (2014b, Mathworks, Natick, MA, α=0.05). Two-tailed, pearson's linear correlation coefficients are reported. Group differences were determined using Kruskal Wallis test. Pair-wise comparisons were performed using a Tukey correction.

Results

Extremely high and variable impaction forces were measured (Table 1, Figure 2). The maximum force was nearly 27 kN; however, that value reduced to ∼18kN when the data from an outlier surgeon was removed. Maximum impaction forces were 12.45±4.36 kN, and the average was 10.47±3.63 kN. The pulloff force ranged from 0.94 kN to 5.54 kN with an average of 2.76±1.19 kN. Higher impaction forces required higher pulloff forces to disengage the taper connection (p<0.001, R>−0.608).

Ceramic humeral heads showed a 24% higher fixation strength (p=0.004) under similar engagement conditions (p=0.18) in comparison to metal components.

Head size does not appear to influence either the magnitude of the impaction force surgeons use (p>0.20) nor the force needed to disengage the taper (p=0.25).

The surgeon performing the insertion had a significant influence on the impaction strike timing (p<0.001), number of strikes (p<0.001), and the impaction forces (p<0.03) and the pulloff force (p<0.001).