Is TKA femoral implant stability improved by pressure applied cement? a comparison of 2 cementing techniques
Abstract Background The majority of knee endoprostheses are cemented. In an earlier study the effects of different cementing techniques on cement penetration were evaluated using a Sawbone model. In this study we used a human cadaver model to study the effect of different cementing techniques on rel...
| Main Authors: | , , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
BMC
2023-01-01
|
| Series: | BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://doi.org/10.1186/s12891-023-06151-0 |
| _version_ | 1797946126143324160 |
|---|---|
| author | Mareike Schonhoff Nicholas A. Beckmann Martin Schwarze Marvin Eissler J. Philippe Kretzer Tobias Renkawitz Sebastian Jaeger |
| author_facet | Mareike Schonhoff Nicholas A. Beckmann Martin Schwarze Marvin Eissler J. Philippe Kretzer Tobias Renkawitz Sebastian Jaeger |
| author_sort | Mareike Schonhoff |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | Abstract Background The majority of knee endoprostheses are cemented. In an earlier study the effects of different cementing techniques on cement penetration were evaluated using a Sawbone model. In this study we used a human cadaver model to study the effect of different cementing techniques on relative motion between the implant and the femoral shaft component under dynamic loading. Methods Two different cementing techniques were tested in a group of 15 pairs of human fresh frozen legs. In one group a conventional cementation technique was used and, in another group, cementation was done using a pressurizing technique. Under dynamic loading that simulated real life conditions relative motion at the bone-implant interface were studied at 20 degrees and 50 degrees flexion. Results In both scenarios, the relative motion anterior was significantly increased by pressure application. Distally, it was the same with higher loads. No significant difference could be measured posteriorly at 20°. At 50° flexion, however, pressurization reduced the posterior relative motion significantly at each load level. Conclusion The use of the pressurizer does not improve the overall fixation compared to an adequate manual cement application. The change depends on the loading, flexion angle and varies in its proportion in between the interface zones. |
| first_indexed | 2024-04-10T21:05:59Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-f48ade987e664d2ca30a6d755008b28e |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 1471-2474 |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-04-10T21:05:59Z |
| publishDate | 2023-01-01 |
| publisher | BMC |
| record_format | Article |
| series | BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders |
| spelling | doaj.art-f48ade987e664d2ca30a6d755008b28e2023-01-22T12:02:10ZengBMCBMC Musculoskeletal Disorders1471-24742023-01-0124111010.1186/s12891-023-06151-0Is TKA femoral implant stability improved by pressure applied cement? a comparison of 2 cementing techniquesMareike Schonhoff0Nicholas A. Beckmann1Martin Schwarze2Marvin Eissler3J. Philippe Kretzer4Tobias Renkawitz5Sebastian Jaeger6Laboratory of Biomechanics and Implant Research, Department of Orthopaedics, Heidelberg University HospitalDepartment of Orthopaedics, Heidelberg University HospitalLaboratory of Biomechanics and Implant Research, Department of Orthopaedics, Heidelberg University HospitalDepartment of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, Heidelberg University HospitalLaboratory of Biomechanics and Implant Research, Department of Orthopaedics, Heidelberg University HospitalDepartment of Orthopaedics, Heidelberg University HospitalLaboratory of Biomechanics and Implant Research, Department of Orthopaedics, Heidelberg University HospitalAbstract Background The majority of knee endoprostheses are cemented. In an earlier study the effects of different cementing techniques on cement penetration were evaluated using a Sawbone model. In this study we used a human cadaver model to study the effect of different cementing techniques on relative motion between the implant and the femoral shaft component under dynamic loading. Methods Two different cementing techniques were tested in a group of 15 pairs of human fresh frozen legs. In one group a conventional cementation technique was used and, in another group, cementation was done using a pressurizing technique. Under dynamic loading that simulated real life conditions relative motion at the bone-implant interface were studied at 20 degrees and 50 degrees flexion. Results In both scenarios, the relative motion anterior was significantly increased by pressure application. Distally, it was the same with higher loads. No significant difference could be measured posteriorly at 20°. At 50° flexion, however, pressurization reduced the posterior relative motion significantly at each load level. Conclusion The use of the pressurizer does not improve the overall fixation compared to an adequate manual cement application. The change depends on the loading, flexion angle and varies in its proportion in between the interface zones.https://doi.org/10.1186/s12891-023-06151-0Total knee arthroplastyCementing techniquePressurizerLooseningRelative motion |
| spellingShingle | Mareike Schonhoff Nicholas A. Beckmann Martin Schwarze Marvin Eissler J. Philippe Kretzer Tobias Renkawitz Sebastian Jaeger Is TKA femoral implant stability improved by pressure applied cement? a comparison of 2 cementing techniques BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders Total knee arthroplasty Cementing technique Pressurizer Loosening Relative motion |
| title | Is TKA femoral implant stability improved by pressure applied cement? a comparison of 2 cementing techniques |
| title_full | Is TKA femoral implant stability improved by pressure applied cement? a comparison of 2 cementing techniques |
| title_fullStr | Is TKA femoral implant stability improved by pressure applied cement? a comparison of 2 cementing techniques |
| title_full_unstemmed | Is TKA femoral implant stability improved by pressure applied cement? a comparison of 2 cementing techniques |
| title_short | Is TKA femoral implant stability improved by pressure applied cement? a comparison of 2 cementing techniques |
| title_sort | is tka femoral implant stability improved by pressure applied cement a comparison of 2 cementing techniques |
| topic | Total knee arthroplasty Cementing technique Pressurizer Loosening Relative motion |
| url | https://doi.org/10.1186/s12891-023-06151-0 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT mareikeschonhoff istkafemoralimplantstabilityimprovedbypressureappliedcementacomparisonof2cementingtechniques AT nicholasabeckmann istkafemoralimplantstabilityimprovedbypressureappliedcementacomparisonof2cementingtechniques AT martinschwarze istkafemoralimplantstabilityimprovedbypressureappliedcementacomparisonof2cementingtechniques AT marvineissler istkafemoralimplantstabilityimprovedbypressureappliedcementacomparisonof2cementingtechniques AT jphilippekretzer istkafemoralimplantstabilityimprovedbypressureappliedcementacomparisonof2cementingtechniques AT tobiasrenkawitz istkafemoralimplantstabilityimprovedbypressureappliedcementacomparisonof2cementingtechniques AT sebastianjaeger istkafemoralimplantstabilityimprovedbypressureappliedcementacomparisonof2cementingtechniques |