Literature DB >> 24259367

Cement augmentation of hip implants in osteoporotic bone: how much cement is needed and where should it go?

A Sermon1, L Hofmann-Fliri, R G Richards, J Flamaing, M Windolf.   

Abstract

Several studies proved the beneficial effect of cement augmentation of proximal femoral nail antirotation (PFNA) blades on implant purchase in osteoporotic bone. We investigated the effect of different localizations and amounts of bone cement. Polyurethane foam specimens were instrumented with a PFNA blade and subsequently augmented with PMMA bone cement. Eight study groups were formed based on localization and amount of cement volume related to the blade. All specimens underwent cyclic loading with physiological orientation of the force vector until construct failure. Foam groups were compared between each other and to a cadaveric control group. The experiments revealed a significant dependency of implant purchase on localization and amount of cement. Biomechanically favorable cement positions were found at the implant tip and at the cranial side. However, none of the tested augmentation patterns performed significantly inferior to the cadaveric benchmark. These findings will allow surgeons to further reduce the amount of injected PMMA, decreasing the risk of cement leakage or cartilage damage.
© 2013 Orthopaedic Research Society. Published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Entities:  

Keywords:  cement; helical blade; hip fracture; implant augmentation; osteoporosis

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2013        PMID: 24259367     DOI: 10.1002/jor.22522

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Orthop Res        ISSN: 0736-0266            Impact factor:   3.494


  8 in total

Review 1.  [Biomechanics of implant augmentation].

Authors:  M Windolf
Journal:  Unfallchirurg       Date:  2015-09       Impact factor: 1.000

2.  Trochanteric fragility fractures : Treatment using the cement-augmented proximal femoral nail antirotation.

Authors:  C Neuerburg; S Mehaffey; M Gosch; W Böcker; M Blauth; C Kammerlander
Journal:  Oper Orthop Traumatol       Date:  2016-05-31       Impact factor: 1.154

Review 3.  [Hip fractures in the elderly : Osteosynthesis versus joint replacement].

Authors:  M Knobe; C H Siebert
Journal:  Orthopade       Date:  2014-04       Impact factor: 1.087

4.  Removal of cement-augmented screws in distal femoral fractures and the effect of retained screws and cement on total knee arthroplasty: a biomechanical investigation.

Authors:  Thomas Vordemvenne; Dominic Gehweiler; Dirk Wähnert; Niklas Grüneweller; Boyko Gueorguiev
Journal:  J Orthop Traumatol       Date:  2021-02-27

5.  Indications for cement augmentation in fixation of geriatric intertrochanteric femur fractures: a systematic review of evidence.

Authors:  L Henry Goodnough; Harsh Wadhwa; Seth S Tigchelaar; Malcolm R DeBaun; Michael J Chen; Matt L Graves; Michael J Gardner
Journal:  Arch Orthop Trauma Surg       Date:  2021-04-07       Impact factor: 2.928

6.  Does metaphyseal cement augmentation in fracture management influence the adjacent subchondral bone and joint cartilage?: an in vivo study in sheep stifle joints.

Authors:  Michael Goetzen; Ladina Hofmann-Fliri; Daniel Arens; Stephan Zeiter; Vincent Stadelmann; Dirk Nehrbass; R Geoff Richards; Michael Blauth
Journal:  Medicine (Baltimore)       Date:  2015-01       Impact factor: 1.889

7.  The PFNA® Augmented in Revision Surgery of Proximal Femur Fractures.

Authors:  Alexander Scola; Florian Gebhard; Christoph Dehner; Götz Röderer
Journal:  Open Orthop J       Date:  2014-07-11

Review 8.  Anchorage strategies in geriatric hip fracture management.

Authors:  Matthias Knobe; Hans-Christoph Pape
Journal:  Innov Surg Sci       Date:  2016-12-22
  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.