使用骨质疏松复合骨模型研究骨水泥抛光锥形滑动柄周围股骨假体周围骨折风险的危险因素。

IF 1.7 4区 医学 Q3 ENGINEERING, BIOMEDICAL
Sameer Jain, Jonathan N Lamb, Ruth Drake, Ian Entwistle, James P Baren, Zachary Thompson, Andrew R Beadling, Michael G Bryant, Farag Shuweihdi, Hemant Pandit
{"title":"使用骨质疏松复合骨模型研究骨水泥抛光锥形滑动柄周围股骨假体周围骨折风险的危险因素。","authors":"Sameer Jain, Jonathan N Lamb, Ruth Drake, Ian Entwistle, James P Baren, Zachary Thompson, Andrew R Beadling, Michael G Bryant, Farag Shuweihdi, Hemant Pandit","doi":"10.1177/09544119231225172","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>This biomechanical study aimed to determine if variations in stem material, stem geometry, stem offset and cement viscosity affect mechanical resistance to postoperative periprosthetic fracture (PFF) after hip arthroplasty with a commonly used cemented polished taper-slip (PTS) stem (CPT, Zimmer Biomet) in a novel osteoporotic composite femoral bone model. Thirty-six osteoporotic composite femoral models were tested using a standardised in-vitro loading technique to simulate a typical PFF. Outcome measures were torque to failure (N), fracture energy (N/m<sup>2</sup>) and rotation to failure (°). Comparisons were made by stem material (cobalt chrome vs stainless steel), stem geometry (CPT stem vs Exeter stem), stem offset (standard offset vs extra extended offset) and cement viscosity (high viscosity vs low viscosity). Statistical comparisons were carried out with significance set at <i>p</i> < 0.05. All tested samples produced clinically representative fracture patterns with varying degrees of bone and cement comminution. There was no statistically significant difference in torque to failure, fracture energy or rotation to failure between any of the compared variables (all <i>p</i> > 0.05). This is the first biomechanical study on mechanical resistance to PFF using osteoporotic composite bone models. For the CPT stem, it confirms that stem material, stem offset, stem geometry and cement viscosity do not affect mechanical resistance to PFF in an osteoporotic bone model.</p>","PeriodicalId":20666,"journal":{"name":"Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part H: Journal of Engineering in Medicine","volume":" ","pages":"324-331"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Risk factors for periprosthetic femoral fracture risk around a cemented polished taper-slip stem using an osteoporotic composite bone model.\",\"authors\":\"Sameer Jain, Jonathan N Lamb, Ruth Drake, Ian Entwistle, James P Baren, Zachary Thompson, Andrew R Beadling, Michael G Bryant, Farag Shuweihdi, Hemant Pandit\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/09544119231225172\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>This biomechanical study aimed to determine if variations in stem material, stem geometry, stem offset and cement viscosity affect mechanical resistance to postoperative periprosthetic fracture (PFF) after hip arthroplasty with a commonly used cemented polished taper-slip (PTS) stem (CPT, Zimmer Biomet) in a novel osteoporotic composite femoral bone model. Thirty-six osteoporotic composite femoral models were tested using a standardised in-vitro loading technique to simulate a typical PFF. Outcome measures were torque to failure (N), fracture energy (N/m<sup>2</sup>) and rotation to failure (°). Comparisons were made by stem material (cobalt chrome vs stainless steel), stem geometry (CPT stem vs Exeter stem), stem offset (standard offset vs extra extended offset) and cement viscosity (high viscosity vs low viscosity). Statistical comparisons were carried out with significance set at <i>p</i> < 0.05. All tested samples produced clinically representative fracture patterns with varying degrees of bone and cement comminution. There was no statistically significant difference in torque to failure, fracture energy or rotation to failure between any of the compared variables (all <i>p</i> > 0.05). This is the first biomechanical study on mechanical resistance to PFF using osteoporotic composite bone models. For the CPT stem, it confirms that stem material, stem offset, stem geometry and cement viscosity do not affect mechanical resistance to PFF in an osteoporotic bone model.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":20666,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part H: Journal of Engineering in Medicine\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"324-331\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-03-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part H: Journal of Engineering in Medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"5\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/09544119231225172\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/1/18 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"ENGINEERING, BIOMEDICAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part H: Journal of Engineering in Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"5","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/09544119231225172","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/18 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ENGINEERING, BIOMEDICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

这项生物力学研究旨在确定,在新型骨质疏松复合股骨头模型中,使用常用的骨水泥抛光锥滑(PTS)骨水泥柄(CPT,Zimmer Biomet)进行髋关节置换术后,骨水泥柄材料、骨水泥柄几何形状、骨水泥柄偏移量和骨水泥粘度的变化是否会影响对术后假体周围骨折(PFF)的机械阻力。采用标准化体外加载技术对 36 个骨质疏松复合股骨头模型进行了测试,以模拟典型的 PFF。结果测量指标为破坏扭矩(牛顿)、骨折能量(牛顿/平方米)和破坏旋转角度(°)。比较对象包括牙杆材料(钴铬合金与不锈钢)、牙杆几何形状(CPT牙杆与Exeter牙杆)、牙杆偏移量(标准偏移量与超长偏移量)和水泥粘度(高粘度与低粘度)。统计比较的显著性设定为 p p > 0.05)。这是首次使用骨质疏松复合骨模型对 PFF 的机械阻力进行生物力学研究。对于CPT骨干来说,它证实了骨干材料、骨干偏移、骨干几何形状和骨水泥粘度不会影响骨质疏松骨模型对PFF的机械阻力。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Risk factors for periprosthetic femoral fracture risk around a cemented polished taper-slip stem using an osteoporotic composite bone model.

This biomechanical study aimed to determine if variations in stem material, stem geometry, stem offset and cement viscosity affect mechanical resistance to postoperative periprosthetic fracture (PFF) after hip arthroplasty with a commonly used cemented polished taper-slip (PTS) stem (CPT, Zimmer Biomet) in a novel osteoporotic composite femoral bone model. Thirty-six osteoporotic composite femoral models were tested using a standardised in-vitro loading technique to simulate a typical PFF. Outcome measures were torque to failure (N), fracture energy (N/m2) and rotation to failure (°). Comparisons were made by stem material (cobalt chrome vs stainless steel), stem geometry (CPT stem vs Exeter stem), stem offset (standard offset vs extra extended offset) and cement viscosity (high viscosity vs low viscosity). Statistical comparisons were carried out with significance set at p < 0.05. All tested samples produced clinically representative fracture patterns with varying degrees of bone and cement comminution. There was no statistically significant difference in torque to failure, fracture energy or rotation to failure between any of the compared variables (all p > 0.05). This is the first biomechanical study on mechanical resistance to PFF using osteoporotic composite bone models. For the CPT stem, it confirms that stem material, stem offset, stem geometry and cement viscosity do not affect mechanical resistance to PFF in an osteoporotic bone model.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.60
自引率
5.60%
发文量
122
审稿时长
6 months
期刊介绍: The Journal of Engineering in Medicine is an interdisciplinary journal encompassing all aspects of engineering in medicine. The Journal is a vital tool for maintaining an understanding of the newest techniques and research in medical engineering.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信