Kalteis Thomas, Pförringer Dominik, Herold Thomas, Handel Martin, Renkawitz Tobias, Plitz Wolfgang
Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, University of Regensburg, Asklepios Klinikum, Kaiser-Karl V-Allee 3, 93077, Bad Abbach, Germany.
Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 2007 Dec;127(10):873-7. doi: 10.1007/s00402-007-0418-4. Epub 2007 Sep 1.
Some of the systems marketed for pulsatile high-pressure lavage are clearly different in their mechanical pulse characteristics. To take the matter further we set up an experimental in vitro model to determine whether these different lavage systems might produce different cementation results because of their differing pulse characteristics, and whether the systems differed significantly in terms of cement depth penetration.
A total of 48 femoral heads were obtained at operation from patients who had undergone endoprosthetic hip replacement. The specimens were subjected to manual rinsing or semiautomatic cleansing procedures with five different pulsatile lavage devices. After the cleansing procedures, polymethylmetacrylate bone cement was intruded into the cancellous bone under standardised conditions. Determination of cement penetration was done by computed tomography using an image processing software.
Irrespective of the nature of the lavage system tested, superficial cement penetration, both up to 2 mm and up to 3 mm, was significantly better after pulsatile high-pressure lavage than it was after manual rinsing of the specimens with a bladder syringe (P < 0.001 in each case). Whereas our experimental model did not show any significant differences between the lavage systems as regards the cementation results to a depth of up to 2 mm (P = 0.996), there were significant differences at a target depth of 3 mm (P < 0.05).
As compared with manual rinsing, pulsatile high-pressure lavage in vitro makes highly significant improvements in cement penetration into cancellous bone and should be regarded as an indispensable component of modern cementation techniques for endoprosthetic surgery. Up to the present we have not been able to ascertain what influence the different pulse characteristics of a pulsatile lavage system may have on the intended cementation result, whether it is impact force, pulse shape, pulse duration, flow rate or frequency. Appropriate investigations will be necessary.
一些用于脉动高压冲洗的系统在其机械脉冲特性上明显不同。为了进一步研究这个问题,我们建立了一个体外实验模型,以确定这些不同的冲洗系统是否因其不同的脉冲特性而可能产生不同的骨水泥固定效果,以及这些系统在骨水泥深度渗透方面是否存在显著差异。
从接受髋关节置换术的患者手术中获取了48个股骨头标本。使用五种不同的脉动冲洗装置对标本进行手动冲洗或半自动清洁程序。清洁程序后,在标准化条件下将聚甲基丙烯酸甲酯骨水泥注入松质骨。使用图像处理软件通过计算机断层扫描确定骨水泥的渗透情况。
无论测试的冲洗系统的性质如何,脉动高压冲洗后,骨水泥在2毫米和3毫米深度的表面渗透明显优于用膀胱注射器对标本进行手动冲洗(每种情况P < 0.001)。虽然我们的实验模型在骨水泥固定到2毫米深度的结果方面未显示冲洗系统之间有任何显著差异(P = 0.996),但在目标深度为3毫米时存在显著差异(P < 0.05)。
与手动冲洗相比,体外脉动高压冲洗在骨水泥向松质骨的渗透方面有显著改善,应被视为现代假体手术骨水泥固定技术中不可或缺的组成部分。到目前为止,我们还无法确定脉动冲洗系统的不同脉冲特性可能对预期的骨水泥固定结果有何种影响,无论是冲击力、脉冲形状、脉冲持续时间、流速还是频率。需要进行适当的研究。