Advertisement for orthosearch.org.uk
Results 1 - 3 of 3
Results per page:
Bone & Joint Research
Vol. 9, Issue 8 | Pages 515 - 523
1 Aug 2020
Bergiers S Hothi H Henckel J Eskelinen A Skinner J Hart A

Aims

The optimum clearance between the bearing surfaces of hip arthroplasties is unknown. Theoretically, to minimize wear, it is understood that clearances must be low enough to maintain optimal contact pressure and fluid film lubrication, while being large enough to allow lubricant recovery and reduce contact patch size. This study aimed to identify the relationship between diametrical clearance and volumetric wear, through the analysis of retrieved components.

Methods

A total of 81 metal-on-metal Pinnacle hips paired with 12/14 stems were included in this study. Geometrical analysis was performed on each component, using coordinate and roundness measuring machines. The relationship between their as-manufactured diametrical clearance and volumetric wear was investigated. The Mann-Whitney U test and unpaired t-test were used, in addition to calculating the non-parametric Spearman's correlation coefficient, to statistically evaluate the acquired data.


Bone & Joint Research
Vol. 7, Issue 11 | Pages 595 - 600
1 Nov 2018
Bergiers S Hothi HS Henckel J Eskelinen A Skinner J Hart A

Objectives

Previous studies have suggested that metal-on-metal (MoM) Pinnacle (DePuy Synthes, Warsaw, Indiana) hip arthroplasties implanted after 2006 exhibit higher failure rates. This was attributed to the production of implants with reduced diametrical clearances between their bearing surfaces, which, it was speculated, were outside manufacturing tolerances. This study aimed to better understand the performance of Pinnacle Systems manufactured before and after this event.

Methods

A total of 92 retrieved MoM Pinnacle hips were analyzed, of which 45 were implanted before 2007, and 47 from 2007 onwards. The ‘pre-2007’ group contained 45 implants retrieved from 21 male and 24 female patients, with a median age of 61.3 years (interquartile range (IQR) 57.1 to 65.5); the ‘2007 onwards’ group contained 47 implants retrieved from 19 male and 28 female patients, with a median age of 61.8 years (IQR 58.5 to 67.8). The volume of material lost from their bearing and taper surfaces was measured using coordinate and roundness measuring machines. These outcomes were then compared statistically using linear regression models, adjusting for potentially confounding factors.


Bone & Joint Research
Vol. 1, Issue 7 | Pages 152 - 157
1 Jul 2012
Hamilton DF Gatherer D Jenkins PJ Maclean JGB Hutchison JD Nutton RW Simpson AHRW

Objectives. To evaluate the neck strength of school-aged rugby players, and to define the relationship with proxy physical measures with a view to predicting neck strength. Methods. Cross-sectional cohort study involving 382 rugby playing schoolchildren at three Scottish schools (all male, aged between 12 and 18 years). Outcome measures included maximal isometric neck extension, weight, height, grip strength, cervical range of movement and neck circumference. Results. Mean neck extension strength increased with age (p = 0.001), although a wide inter-age range variation was evident, with the result that some of the oldest children presented with the same neck strength as the mean of the youngest group. Grip strength explained the most variation in neck strength (R. 2. = 0.53), while cervical range of movement and neck girth demonstrated no relationship. Multivariable analysis demonstrated the independent effects of age, weight and grip strength, and the resultant model explained 62.1% of the variance in neck strength. This model predicted actual neck strength well for the majority of players, although there was a tendency towards overestimation at the lowest range and underestimation at the highest. Conclusion. A wide variation was evident in neck strength across the range of the schoolchild-playing population, with a surprisingly large number of senior players demonstrating the same mean strength as the 12-year-old mean value. This may suggest that current training regimes address limb strength but not neck strength, which may be significant for future neck injury prevention strategies. Age, weight and grip strength can predict around two thirds of the variation in neck strength, however specific assessment is required if precise data is sought