Oliver E Bischel, Jörn B Seeger, Matthias K Jung, Stefan Dörfler, Arnold J Höppchen, Alexander Jahnke, Eike Jakubowitz
{"title":"股骨管预备过程中扩孔速度的影响——两种带凹槽锥形设计的直股翻修管的体外分析。","authors":"Oliver E Bischel, Jörn B Seeger, Matthias K Jung, Stefan Dörfler, Arnold J Höppchen, Alexander Jahnke, Eike Jakubowitz","doi":"10.3390/bioengineering12090984","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><i>Background:</i> The use of tapered fluted revision stems has been shown to be reliable and safe. Primary stability is mandatory for a long-lasting fixation between bone and a prosthesis. Nevertheless, aseptic loosening due to insufficient primary stability occurs and may be related to technically improper preparation of the femoral canal. Instructions of manufacturers are heterogeneous regarding preparation of implant beds. <i>Questions/Purposes:</i> Does speed or the design of the reamer influence the accuracy of the implant bed and, consecutively, primary stability? <i>Materials and Methods:</i> A test foam with an elastic moduli and pressure resistance similar to that of cancellous bone was used. The medullary canal was prepared with the use of reamers of two different straight and tapered femoral revision devices. Three different rotational speeds were used for preparation. After preparation, primary stability was measured and fixating characteristics were derived. <i>Results:</i> Sufficient primary stability was achievable by all three preparation methods but fixating characteristics were different. Significantly higher micro-motions were detected near the tip of the prosthesis compared to those at all more proximal measuring points. Reaming with high velocity resulted in significantly higher micro-motions compared to that with mid- or low-speed burring. <i>Conclusions:</i> Different preparation methods may be one explanation for the range of reported survivorship data of the two devices with aseptic loosening as the end point. The precision of the implant bed and fixating characteristics were best after reaming with lower velocity. Superior but not significantly better fixation characteristics were achieved with the monobloc stem compared to those with the modular device.</p>","PeriodicalId":8874,"journal":{"name":"Bioengineering","volume":"12 9","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12467323/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Influence of Reaming Velocity During Preparation of the Femoral Canal-An In Vitro Analysis of Two Straight Femoral Revision Stems with a Fluted Tapered Design.\",\"authors\":\"Oliver E Bischel, Jörn B Seeger, Matthias K Jung, Stefan Dörfler, Arnold J Höppchen, Alexander Jahnke, Eike Jakubowitz\",\"doi\":\"10.3390/bioengineering12090984\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p><i>Background:</i> The use of tapered fluted revision stems has been shown to be reliable and safe. Primary stability is mandatory for a long-lasting fixation between bone and a prosthesis. Nevertheless, aseptic loosening due to insufficient primary stability occurs and may be related to technically improper preparation of the femoral canal. Instructions of manufacturers are heterogeneous regarding preparation of implant beds. <i>Questions/Purposes:</i> Does speed or the design of the reamer influence the accuracy of the implant bed and, consecutively, primary stability? <i>Materials and Methods:</i> A test foam with an elastic moduli and pressure resistance similar to that of cancellous bone was used. The medullary canal was prepared with the use of reamers of two different straight and tapered femoral revision devices. Three different rotational speeds were used for preparation. After preparation, primary stability was measured and fixating characteristics were derived. <i>Results:</i> Sufficient primary stability was achievable by all three preparation methods but fixating characteristics were different. Significantly higher micro-motions were detected near the tip of the prosthesis compared to those at all more proximal measuring points. Reaming with high velocity resulted in significantly higher micro-motions compared to that with mid- or low-speed burring. <i>Conclusions:</i> Different preparation methods may be one explanation for the range of reported survivorship data of the two devices with aseptic loosening as the end point. The precision of the implant bed and fixating characteristics were best after reaming with lower velocity. Superior but not significantly better fixation characteristics were achieved with the monobloc stem compared to those with the modular device.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":8874,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Bioengineering\",\"volume\":\"12 9\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-09-16\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12467323/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Bioengineering\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"5\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3390/bioengineering12090984\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"ENGINEERING, BIOMEDICAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Bioengineering","FirstCategoryId":"5","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3390/bioengineering12090984","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ENGINEERING, BIOMEDICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
The Influence of Reaming Velocity During Preparation of the Femoral Canal-An In Vitro Analysis of Two Straight Femoral Revision Stems with a Fluted Tapered Design.
Background: The use of tapered fluted revision stems has been shown to be reliable and safe. Primary stability is mandatory for a long-lasting fixation between bone and a prosthesis. Nevertheless, aseptic loosening due to insufficient primary stability occurs and may be related to technically improper preparation of the femoral canal. Instructions of manufacturers are heterogeneous regarding preparation of implant beds. Questions/Purposes: Does speed or the design of the reamer influence the accuracy of the implant bed and, consecutively, primary stability? Materials and Methods: A test foam with an elastic moduli and pressure resistance similar to that of cancellous bone was used. The medullary canal was prepared with the use of reamers of two different straight and tapered femoral revision devices. Three different rotational speeds were used for preparation. After preparation, primary stability was measured and fixating characteristics were derived. Results: Sufficient primary stability was achievable by all three preparation methods but fixating characteristics were different. Significantly higher micro-motions were detected near the tip of the prosthesis compared to those at all more proximal measuring points. Reaming with high velocity resulted in significantly higher micro-motions compared to that with mid- or low-speed burring. Conclusions: Different preparation methods may be one explanation for the range of reported survivorship data of the two devices with aseptic loosening as the end point. The precision of the implant bed and fixating characteristics were best after reaming with lower velocity. Superior but not significantly better fixation characteristics were achieved with the monobloc stem compared to those with the modular device.
期刊介绍:
Aims
Bioengineering (ISSN 2306-5354) provides an advanced forum for the science and technology of bioengineering. It publishes original research papers, comprehensive reviews, communications and case reports. Our aim is to encourage scientists to publish their experimental and theoretical results in as much detail as possible. All aspects of bioengineering are welcomed from theoretical concepts to education and applications. There is no restriction on the length of the papers. The full experimental details must be provided so that the results can be reproduced. There are, in addition, four key features of this Journal:
● We are introducing a new concept in scientific and technical publications “The Translational Case Report in Bioengineering”. It is a descriptive explanatory analysis of a transformative or translational event. Understanding that the goal of bioengineering scholarship is to advance towards a transformative or clinical solution to an identified transformative/clinical need, the translational case report is used to explore causation in order to find underlying principles that may guide other similar transformative/translational undertakings.
● Manuscripts regarding research proposals and research ideas will be particularly welcomed.
● Electronic files and software regarding the full details of the calculation and experimental procedure, if unable to be published in a normal way, can be deposited as supplementary material.
● We also accept manuscripts communicating to a broader audience with regard to research projects financed with public funds.
Scope
● Bionics and biological cybernetics: implantology; bio–abio interfaces
● Bioelectronics: wearable electronics; implantable electronics; “more than Moore” electronics; bioelectronics devices
● Bioprocess and biosystems engineering and applications: bioprocess design; biocatalysis; bioseparation and bioreactors; bioinformatics; bioenergy; etc.
● Biomolecular, cellular and tissue engineering and applications: tissue engineering; chromosome engineering; embryo engineering; cellular, molecular and synthetic biology; metabolic engineering; bio-nanotechnology; micro/nano technologies; genetic engineering; transgenic technology
● Biomedical engineering and applications: biomechatronics; biomedical electronics; biomechanics; biomaterials; biomimetics; biomedical diagnostics; biomedical therapy; biomedical devices; sensors and circuits; biomedical imaging and medical information systems; implants and regenerative medicine; neurotechnology; clinical engineering; rehabilitation engineering
● Biochemical engineering and applications: metabolic pathway engineering; modeling and simulation
● Translational bioengineering