Advertisement for orthosearch.org.uk
Results 1 - 4 of 4
Results per page:
Bone & Joint Research
Vol. 13, Issue 6 | Pages 272 - 278
5 Jun 2024
Niki Y Huber G Behzadi K Morlock MM

Aims

Periprosthetic fracture and implant loosening are two of the major reasons for revision surgery of cementless implants. Optimal implant fixation with minimal bone damage is challenging in this procedure. This pilot study investigates whether vibratory implant insertion is gentler compared to consecutive single blows for acetabular component implantation in a surrogate polyurethane (PU) model.

Methods

Acetabular components (cups) were implanted into 1 mm nominal under-sized cavities in PU foams (15 and 30 per cubic foot (PCF)) using a vibratory implant insertion device and an automated impaction device for single blows. The impaction force, remaining polar gap, and lever-out moment were measured and compared between the impaction methods.


The Bone & Joint Journal
Vol. 105-B, Issue 3 | Pages 261 - 268
1 Mar 2023
Ruhr M Huber G Niki Y Lohner L Ondruschka B Morlock MM

Aims

The aim of the study was to investigate whether the primary stability of press-fit acetabular components can be improved by altering the impaction procedure.

Methods

Three impaction procedures were used to implant acetabular components into human cadaveric acetabula using a powered impaction device. An impaction frequency of 1 Hz until complete component seating served as reference. Overimpaction was simulated by adding ten strokes after complete component seating. High-frequency implantation was performed at 6 Hz. The lever-out moment of the acetabular components was used as measure for primary stability. Permanent bone deformation was assessed by comparison of double micro-CT (µCT) measurements before and after impaction. Acetabular component deformation and impaction forces were recorded, and the extent of bone-implant contact was determined from 3D laser scans.


The Bone & Joint Journal
Vol. 98-B, Issue 8 | Pages 1099 - 1105
1 Aug 2016
Weiser L Dreimann M Huber G Sellenschloh K Püschel K Morlock MM Rueger JM Lehmann W

Aims

Loosening of pedicle screws is a major complication of posterior spinal stabilisation, especially in the osteoporotic spine. Our aim was to evaluate the effect of cement augmentation compared with extended dorsal instrumentation on the stability of posterior spinal fixation.

Materials and Methods

A total of 12 osteoporotic human cadaveric spines (T11-L3) were randomised by bone mineral density into two groups and instrumented with pedicle screws: group I (SHORT) separated T12 or L2 and group II (EXTENDED) specimen consisting of T11/12 to L2/3. Screws were augmented with cement unilaterally in each vertebra. Fatigue testing was performed using a cranial-caudal sinusoidal, cyclic (1.0 Hz) load with stepwise increasing peak force.


The early failure and revision of bimodular primary total hip arthroplasty prostheses requires the identification of the risk factors for material loss and wear at the taper junctions through taper wear analysis. Deviations in taper geometries between revised and pristine modular neck tapers were determined using high resolution tactile measurements. A new algorithm was developed and validated to allow the quantitative analysis of material loss, complementing the standard visual inspection currently used.

The algorithm was applied to a sample of 27 retrievals (in situ from 2.9 to 38.1 months) of the withdrawn Rejuvenate modular prosthesis. The mean wear volumes on the flat distal neck piece taper was 3.35 mm3 (0.55 to 7.57), mainly occurring in a characteristic pattern in areas with high mechanical loading. Wear volume tended to increase with time to revision (r² = 0.423, p = 0.001). Implant and patient specific data (offset, stem size, patient’s mass, age and body mass index) did not correlate with the amount of material loss observed (p >  0.078). Bilaterally revised implants showed higher amounts of combined total material loss and similar wear patterns on both sides. The consistent wear pattern found in this study has not been reported previously, suggesting that the device design and materials are associated with the failure of this prosthesis.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2015;97-B:1350–7.