Sagittal profile has a significant impact on the explantability of well-fixed cemented stems in revision knee arthroplasty: a biomechanical comparison study of five established knee implant models.


Journal

Archives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery
ISSN: 1434-3916
Titre abrégé: Arch Orthop Trauma Surg
Pays: Germany
ID NLM: 9011043

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
Jul 2019
Historique:
received: 08 11 2018
pubmed: 31 3 2019
medline: 28 10 2019
entrez: 31 3 2019
Statut: ppublish

Résumé

Easy revisability is gaining increasingly in importance. The removal of well-fixed cemented stems is very demanding and is often associated with increased operative morbidity. Implant design may be here a decisive impact factor, and the best way to ascertain it is experimentally. Aim of this study is to assess different cemented stems of established knee revision implants in regard to their removal capability. Based on their sagittal profile, five stem extensions from known manufacturers were divided in conical, conical-cylindrical and cylindrical designs. The pedicles were also characterized in respect to their cross section, diameter and surface roughness. The cemented stems were dismounted six times each in a reproducible biomechanical setup. The explantation energy required was determined and statistical analyzed. The conical shaft needed significantly the slightest explantation energy with 19.2 joules (p = 0.004). There was a strong negative linear correlation between conicity proportion and explantation energy of the cemented stems (R The longitudinal stem profile may have a primary impact on the explantability of well-fixed cemented shafts with conical designs showing superiority. Cross-sectional profile and surface roughness had here a less decisive influence on the explantability. Surgeons can choose proper implants and removal techniques depending on potential implant-associated revision risks and re-revisions to be expected.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND BACKGROUND
Easy revisability is gaining increasingly in importance. The removal of well-fixed cemented stems is very demanding and is often associated with increased operative morbidity. Implant design may be here a decisive impact factor, and the best way to ascertain it is experimentally. Aim of this study is to assess different cemented stems of established knee revision implants in regard to their removal capability.
METHODS METHODS
Based on their sagittal profile, five stem extensions from known manufacturers were divided in conical, conical-cylindrical and cylindrical designs. The pedicles were also characterized in respect to their cross section, diameter and surface roughness. The cemented stems were dismounted six times each in a reproducible biomechanical setup. The explantation energy required was determined and statistical analyzed.
RESULTS RESULTS
The conical shaft needed significantly the slightest explantation energy with 19.2 joules (p = 0.004). There was a strong negative linear correlation between conicity proportion and explantation energy of the cemented stems (R
CONCLUSION CONCLUSIONS
The longitudinal stem profile may have a primary impact on the explantability of well-fixed cemented shafts with conical designs showing superiority. Cross-sectional profile and surface roughness had here a less decisive influence on the explantability. Surgeons can choose proper implants and removal techniques depending on potential implant-associated revision risks and re-revisions to be expected.

Identifiants

pubmed: 30927062
doi: 10.1007/s00402-019-03160-4
pii: 10.1007/s00402-019-03160-4
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

991-998

Auteurs

Alexander Maslaris (A)

Department of Orthopedics, Jena University Hospital, Campus Eisenberg, Klosterlausnitzer Straße 81, 07607, Eisenberg, Germany. alexander_maslaris@hotmail.com.

Frank Layher (F)

Department of Orthopedics, Laboratory of Biomechanics, Jena University Hospital, Campus Eisenberg, Klosterlausnitzer Straße 81, 07607, Eisenberg, Germany.

Matthias Bungartz (M)

Department of Orthopedics, Jena University Hospital, Campus Eisenberg, Klosterlausnitzer Straße 81, 07607, Eisenberg, Germany.

Timo Zippelius (T)

Department of Orthopedics, Jena University Hospital, Campus Eisenberg, Klosterlausnitzer Straße 81, 07607, Eisenberg, Germany.

Emmanouil Liodakis (E)

Trauma Department, Hannover Medical School, Carl-Neuberg-Str. 1, 30625, Hannover, Germany.

Olaf Brinkmann (O)

Department of Orthopedics, Jena University Hospital, Campus Eisenberg, Klosterlausnitzer Straße 81, 07607, Eisenberg, Germany.

Georg Matziolis (G)

Department of Orthopedics, Jena University Hospital, Campus Eisenberg, Klosterlausnitzer Straße 81, 07607, Eisenberg, Germany.

Articles similaires

[Redispensing of expensive oral anticancer medicines: a practical application].

Lisanne N van Merendonk, Kübra Akgöl, Bastiaan Nuijen
1.00
Humans Antineoplastic Agents Administration, Oral Drug Costs Counterfeit Drugs

Smoking Cessation and Incident Cardiovascular Disease.

Jun Hwan Cho, Seung Yong Shin, Hoseob Kim et al.
1.00
Humans Male Smoking Cessation Cardiovascular Diseases Female
Humans United States Aged Cross-Sectional Studies Medicare Part C
1.00
Humans Yoga Low Back Pain Female Male

Classifications MeSH