The dimensional accuracy of preparation of femoral cavity in cementless total hip arthroplasty

Objective: To observe the accuracy of femoral preparation and the position of the cementless prosthesis in femoral cavity, and to compare the results between the computer-assisted surgical group (CASPAR) and the conventional group. Methods: Ten femoral components were implanted either manually or by CASPAR in cadaver femurs. The specimens were cut to 3 mm thick slices. Microradiograms of every slice were sent to a computer for analysis with special software (IDL). The gaps and the medullary cavities between component and bone, the direct bone contact area of the implant surface, the gap width and the percentage of gap and bone contact area were measured in every slice. Results: In the proximal implant coated with HA of the CASPAR group, the average percentage of bone contact reached 93.2% (ranging from 87.6% to 99.7%); the average gap percentage was 2.9% (ranging from 0.3% to 7.8%); the maximum gap width was 0.81 mm and the average gap width was only 0.20 mm. While in the conventional group, the average percentage of bone contact reached 60.1% (ranging from 49.2% to 70.4%); the average gap percentage was 32.8% (ranging from 25.1% to 39.9%); the maximum gap width was 2.97 mm and the average gap width was 0.77 mm. The average gap around the implant in the CASPAR group was only 9% of that in the manual group; the maximum and average gap widths were only about 26% of those in the manual group. On the other hand, the CASPAR group showed 33% higher bone contact than the manual group. Conclusion: With the use of robotics-assisted system, significant progress can be achieved for femoral preparation in total hip arthroplasty.

[1]  C. Bünger,et al.  Transforming growth factor-beta 1 stimulates bone ongrowth to weight-loaded tricalcium phosphate coated implants: an experimental study in dogs. , 1996, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. British volume.

[2]  D. Hungerford,et al.  Total hip replacement without cement for non-inflammatory osteoarthrosis in patients who are less than forty-five years old. , 1993, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. American volume.

[3]  C. Bünger,et al.  Transforming growth factor-beta 1 stimulates bone ongrowth to weight-loaded tricalcium phosphate coated implants: an experimental study in dogs. , 1996, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. British volume.

[4]  U. Witzel,et al.  Computer assisted implantation of the femoral stem in THA – an experimental study , 1999, International Orthopaedics.

[5]  Russell H. Taylor,et al.  Development of a Surgical Robot for Cementless Total Hip Arthroplasty , 1992, Clinical orthopaedics and related research.

[6]  W. Capello,et al.  Omniflex modular femoral component. Two- to five-year results. , 1994, Clinical orthopaedics and related research.

[7]  C. Engh,et al.  Porous-coated hip replacement. The factors governing bone ingrowth, stress shielding, and clinical results. , 1987, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. British volume.

[8]  Y. Kim,et al.  Results of the Harris-Galante cementless hip prosthesis. , 1992, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. British volume.

[9]  S. Cook,et al.  Tissue response to porous-coated implants lacking initial bone apposition. , 1988, The Journal of arthroplasty.

[10]  L. Whiteside,et al.  Reaming Technique of the Femoral Diaphysis in Cementless Total Hip Arthroplasty , 1995, Clinical orthopaedics and related research.

[11]  Wolfgang Görtz,et al.  Robotically-milled bone cavities , 2002, Acta orthopaedica Scandinavica.

[12]  W. Harris,et al.  Unrecognized femoral fractures during cementless total hip arthroplasty in the dog and their effect on bone ingrowth. , 1992, The Journal of arthroplasty.

[13]  Olivier Mouzin,et al.  Femoral Fracture Risk in Hip Arthroplasty: Smooth Versus Toothed Instruments , 2001, Clinical orthopaedics and related research.

[14]  W. Bargar,et al.  Primary and Revision Total Hip Replacement Using the Robodoc® System , 1998, Clinical orthopaedics and related research.

[15]  T. Albrektsson,et al.  Implant fixation improved by close fit. Cylindrical implant-bone interface studied in rabbits. , 1988, Acta orthopaedica Scandinavica.

[16]  R. Barrack,et al.  Thigh pain despite bone ingrowth into uncemented femoral stems. , 1992, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. British volume.

[17]  W H Harris,et al.  Influence of intraoperative femoral fractures and cerclage wiring on bone ingrowth into canine porous-coated femoral components. , 1995, The Journal of arthroplasty.

[18]  W. Bargar.  Uncemented press-fit total hip arthroplasty using the Identifit custom-molding technique: a prospective minimum 2-year follow-up study. , 1996, Journal of Arthroplasty.

[19]  R M Pilliar,et al.  Osteogenic phenomena across endosteal bone-implant spaces with porous surfaced intramedullary implants. , 1981, Acta orthopaedica Scandinavica.

[20]  P. Walker,et al.  Improving the fit of press-fit hip stems. , 1988, Clinical orthopaedics and related research.

[21]  J O Galante,et al.  Primary total hip reconstruction with a titanium fiber-coated prosthesis inserted without cement. , 1993, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. American volume.

[22]  R. Barrack,et al.  Quantitative analysis of tissue growth into human porous total hip components. , 1988, The Journal of arthroplasty.

[23]  J. Chae,et al.  Macroscopic and microscopic evidence of prosthetic fixation with porous-coated materials. , 1988, Clinical orthopaedics and related research.

[24]  J. Hua,et al.  Stability and Bone Preservation in Custom Designed Revision Hip Stems , 2000, Clinical orthopaedics and related research.

[25]  W. Bargar,et al.  Shape the implant to the patient. A rationale for the use of custom-fit cementless total hip implants. , 1989, Clinical orthopaedics and related research.

[26]  H. Tullos,et al.  The anatomic basis of femoral component design. , 1988, Clinical orthopaedics and related research.

[27]  J. McLaughlin,et al.  Total Hip Arthroplasty in Young Patients: 8- to 13-Year Results Using an Uncemented Stem , 2000, Clinical orthopaedics and related research.

[28]  C. Engh,et al.  THE FACTORS GOVERNING BONE INGROWTH, STRESS SHIELDING, AND CLINICAL RESULTS , 1987 .

[29]  V. Goldberg,et al.  Clinical and radiographic outcomes of total hip arthroplasty with insertion of an anatomically designed femoral component without cement for the treatment of primary osteoarthritis. A study with a minimum of six years of follow-up. , 1999, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. American volume.

[30]  Michael M Morlock,et al.  Comparison of robotic-assisted and manual implantation of a primary total hip replacement. A prospective study. , 2003, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. American volume.

[31]  S. Ferguson,et al.  Primary stability of a robodoc implanted anatomical stem versus manual implantation. , 2004, Clinical biomechanics.

[32]  A Coblentz,et al.  Micromotion, Fit, and Fill of Custom Made Femoral Stems Designed With an Automated Process , 1996, Clinical orthopaedics and related research.

[33]  R. Crowninshield,et al.  Bone ingrowth into a low-modulus composite plastic porous-coated canine femoral component. , 1992, The Journal of arthroplasty.

[34]  S. Cook,et al.  The effect of operative fit and hydroxyapatite coating on the mechanical and biological response to porous implants. , 1995, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. American volume.