Influence of muscle traction on the primary stability of a reverse humeral prosthesis.
Muscle traction
Primary stability
Reverse total shoulder arthroplasty
Torsional stress
Journal
Journal of orthopaedics
ISSN: 0972-978X
Titre abrégé: J Orthop
Pays: India
ID NLM: 101233220
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Jul 2023
Jul 2023
Historique:
received:
13
03
2023
revised:
29
05
2023
accepted:
07
06
2023
pmc-release:
01
07
2024
medline:
19
6
2023
pubmed:
19
6
2023
entrez:
19
6
2023
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Currently, the influence of muscle traction on the postoperative stability of humeral prostheses is not adequately researched. This study analyzed the prosthesis' stability The reverse humeral prosthesis "AEQUALIS™ ADJUSTABLE REVERSED" (Stryker) was implanted using press-fit into ten bones with a length of 200 mm and 160 mm. Subsequently, the models were torqued in 30 cycles using a universal testing machine (2 Nm - 6 Nm) and loaded axially to simulate muscle traction. The axial weight increased from 7.7 kg (pure muscle traction) over 40 kg (45-degree abduction) to 69.3 kg (90-degree abduction). The prosthesis' relative micromotion was simultaneously measured at three different measurement heights using high-sensitivity displacement transducers and compared to the relative micromotion without axial load. It was found that a larger torsional moment was associated with a larger relative micromotion in both bone defects studied. However, the influence became significant ( In conclusion, a larger torsional moment is associated with a higher relative micromotion and muscle traction, conclusively, has no effect on the primary stability of the reverse prosthesis for a 200 mm bone
Sections du résumé
Background
UNASSIGNED
Currently, the influence of muscle traction on the postoperative stability of humeral prostheses is not adequately researched. This study analyzed the prosthesis' stability
Methods
UNASSIGNED
The reverse humeral prosthesis "AEQUALIS™ ADJUSTABLE REVERSED" (Stryker) was implanted using press-fit into ten bones with a length of 200 mm and 160 mm. Subsequently, the models were torqued in 30 cycles using a universal testing machine (2 Nm - 6 Nm) and loaded axially to simulate muscle traction. The axial weight increased from 7.7 kg (pure muscle traction) over 40 kg (45-degree abduction) to 69.3 kg (90-degree abduction). The prosthesis' relative micromotion was simultaneously measured at three different measurement heights using high-sensitivity displacement transducers and compared to the relative micromotion without axial load.
Results
UNASSIGNED
It was found that a larger torsional moment was associated with a larger relative micromotion in both bone defects studied. However, the influence became significant (
Conclusion
UNASSIGNED
In conclusion, a larger torsional moment is associated with a higher relative micromotion and muscle traction, conclusively, has no effect on the primary stability of the reverse prosthesis for a 200 mm bone
Identifiants
pubmed: 37333764
doi: 10.1016/j.jor.2023.06.004
pii: S0972-978X(23)00131-9
pmc: PMC10275695
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
57-62Informations de copyright
© 2023 Professor P K Surendran Memorial Education Foundation. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
Références
J Biomech. 2009 Aug 25;42(12):1840-9
pubmed: 19643418
J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2013 Dec;22(12):1682-8
pubmed: 23619248
Orthopade. 2017 Dec;46(12):979-980
pubmed: 29177709
Injury. 2006 Aug;37(8):691-7
pubmed: 16814787
J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2011 Jun;20(4):646-51
pubmed: 21232990
Orthopade. 2017 Dec;46(12):1008-1014
pubmed: 29063145
Am J Orthop (Belle Mead NJ). 2010 Mar;39(3):126-30
pubmed: 20463983
Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon). 2021 Feb;82:105283
pubmed: 33524845
J Biomech. 2007;40(5):1158-64
pubmed: 16806236
Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1986 Jul;(208):108-13
pubmed: 3720113
J Biomech. 2000 Mar;33(3):279-88
pubmed: 10673111
J Orthop Res. 2011 Aug;29(8):1216-21
pubmed: 21671262
Biomed Tech (Berl). 1990;35 Suppl 3:44-7
pubmed: 2078759
Ther Umsch. 2020;77(10):505-510
pubmed: 33272049
Orthopade. 2007 Mar;36(3):195-6, 198-200, 202-4
pubmed: 17333070
J Funct Morphol Kinesiol. 2022 Jan 19;7(1):
pubmed: 35225900
J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2021 May;30(5):1159-1166
pubmed: 32858194
Int Orthop. 2022 Sep;46(9):2097-2104
pubmed: 35750860
Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon). 2000 Jun;15(5):315-21
pubmed: 10758291
Orthopade. 2017 Apr;46(4):373-386
pubmed: 28239741
J Am Acad Orthop Surg. 2017 Jun;25(6):427-438
pubmed: 28459709