Premium
Humeral head resurfacing in central bone defects: In vitro stability of different implants with increasing defect size
Author(s) -
Kasten Philip,
Neubrech Christine,
Raiss Patric,
Nadorf Jan,
Rickert Markus,
Jakubowitz Eike
Publication year - 2012
Publication title -
journal of orthopaedic research
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.041
H-Index - 155
eISSN - 1554-527X
pISSN - 0736-0266
DOI - 10.1002/jor.22074
Subject(s) - implant , head (geology) , medicine , materials science , orthodontics , biomedical engineering , surgery , geology , geomorphology
We examined the rotary motions of two distinct cementless surface replacement arthroplasties of the shoulder that were implanted on humeri with central spherical bone defects of 8%, 17%, and 37% of the head volume ( n = 5 each). Rotary motions were measured under a cyclic torque application and translated into relative micromotions. Implant A with a perforated central crown had micromotions < 150 µm in all bony defects and during all simulated shoulder activities. Implant B with a central tapered tri‐fin pin had no micromotions > 150 µm in defects of 0% and 8% during a strenuous activity like lifting 10 kg, but did exhibit micromotion > 150 µm in 40% of the experiments in defects of 17% and 37%, which could impair bony ingrowth. Implant B displayed a significant increase in micromotions for defects of 8% and 17% ( p < 0.05). Our results suggest that implant A could be used without risk in spherical head defects up to 37% of volume, even in strenuous shoulder activities immediately after its implantation. Implant B, however, is recommended in spherical defects starting from 8% and only during light shoulder activities until bony integration of the implant has occurred. © 2012 Orthopaedic Research Society. Published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Orthop Res 30:1285–1289, 2012