Literature DB >> 35211376

Use of a threaded-coupled femoral extraction device allows for higher extraction force when compared to loop or vice grip devices; A potted stem analysis.

Huai Ming Phen1, William Strawn Godfrey1, Karlee Edwards1, Daniel Thompson1, Thomas L Bradbury1.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Extraction of a well-fixed femoral stem during revision total hip arthroplasty presents a technical challenge to the operating surgeon. The option of several stem designs during implantation necessitates the availability of extraction tools to be utilised intra-operatively. This study aims to compare the amount of axial force generated from using a threaded-coupled extraction device, loop extraction device, and vice-grip universal extraction set on a potted total hip arthroplasty stem construct.
METHODS: A size 7 Stryker Accolade® II femoral stem (Stryker, Mahwah, NJ) was potted within a 5.20 cm inner diameter polyvinyl chloride pipe using a potting medium with tensile strength and lap shear of 1000psi. This construct was coupled to a material testing system whose force transducer was calibrated to a recording speed of 1000 frames per second. The extractors were coupled to the potted stem, and a force of 1.32 J was applied ten times sequentially to each construct. Force was recorded in Newtons.
RESULTS: The maximum average force for the threaded, loop, and Shukla extractors was 111.46 ± 1.77 N, 90.22 ± 0.87 N, and 64.70 ± 9.03 N (p < 0.01). Loss of coupling was not experienced with any extractor.
CONCLUSION: Within our study, the forces observed per constant load when utilising a threaded-coupled extraction device that attaches to the shoulder of the implant were significantly higher than those seen when using an extraction device that couples to the neck of the femoral stem.
© 2022 Delhi Orthopedic Association. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Arthroplasty; Biomechanics; Extraction; Hip; Revision

Year:  2022        PMID: 35211376      PMCID: PMC8844747          DOI: 10.1016/j.jcot.2022.101789

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Clin Orthop Trauma        ISSN: 0976-5662


  12 in total

1.  Component removal in revision total hip arthroplasty.

Authors:  W G Paprosky; S H Weeden; J W Bowling
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2001-12       Impact factor: 4.176

2.  Removal of a well-fixed cementless femoral stem using a microsagittal saw.

Authors:  Young-Min Kim; Soo Taek Lim; Jeong Joon Yoo; Hee Joong Kim
Journal:  J Arthroplasty       Date:  2003-06       Impact factor: 4.757

Review 3.  Removal of well-fixed fixed femoral stems.

Authors:  J-M Laffosse
Journal:  Orthop Traumatol Surg Res       Date:  2016-01-18       Impact factor: 2.256

Review 4.  Removal of solidly fixed implants during revision hip and knee arthroplasty.

Authors:  Bassam A Masri; Philip A Mitchell; Clive P Duncan
Journal:  J Am Acad Orthop Surg       Date:  2005 Jan-Feb       Impact factor: 3.020

5.  Projections of primary and revision hip and knee arthroplasty in the United States from 2005 to 2030.

Authors:  Steven Kurtz; Kevin Ong; Edmund Lau; Fionna Mowat; Michael Halpern
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am       Date:  2007-04       Impact factor: 5.284

6.  Extended proximal femoral osteotomy. A new technique for femoral revision arthroplasty.

Authors:  T I Younger; M S Bradford; R E Magnus; W G Paprosky
Journal:  J Arthroplasty       Date:  1995-06       Impact factor: 4.757

7.  Impact of the economic downturn on total joint replacement demand in the United States: updated projections to 2021.

Authors:  Steven M Kurtz; Kevin L Ong; Edmund Lau; Kevin J Bozic
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am       Date:  2014-04-16       Impact factor: 5.284

8.  Extended Trochanteric Osteotomy in Revision Total Hip Arthroplasty: Contemporary Outcomes of 612 Hips.

Authors:  Matthew P Abdel; Cody C Wyles; Anthony Viste; Kevin I Perry; Robert T Trousdale; Daniel J Berry
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am       Date:  2021-01-20       Impact factor: 5.284

9.  Controlled femoral fracture: easy in.

Authors:  Wayne G Paprosky; Scott M Sporer
Journal:  J Arthroplasty       Date:  2003-04       Impact factor: 4.757

10.  Can bone apposition predict the retention force of a femoral stem? An experimental weight-bearing hip-implant model in goats.

Authors:  Knut Harboe; Christian Lycke Ellingsen; Einar Sudmann; Nils Roar Gjerdet; Kjetil Søreide; Kari Indrekvam
Journal:  BMC Musculoskelet Disord       Date:  2015-04-28       Impact factor: 2.362

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.