*R Adams Cowley Shock Trauma Center, Department of Orthopaedics, University of Maryland School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD; and †Fischell Department of Bioengineering, Orthopaedic Mechanobiology Laboratory, University of Maryland, College Park, MD.
J Orthop Trauma. 2017 May;31(5):281-286. doi: 10.1097/BOT.0000000000000812.
We assessed how reprocessed and damaged drill bits perform relative-to-new drill bits in terms of drilling force required, heat generated at near and far cortices, and number of usable passes.
Nine pairs of nonosteoporotic human cadaveric femora were tested using 3 types of 3.2-mm drill bits (new, reprocessed, and damaged) in 3 investigations (force, temperature, and multiple usable passes). Operating room conditions were simulated. Force and temperature data were collected for each type. The multiple pass investigation measured only force.
New and reprocessed drill bits performed similarly regarding force required and heat generated; both outperformed damaged bits. New and reprocessed bits had a similar number of usable passes in ideal conditions. Damaged bits required nearly 2.6 times as much force to maintain drilling rate.
Reprocessed drill bits seem to be a viable alternative to new drill bits for fracture treatment surgery in terms of force required, heat generated, and number of usable passes. Drill bits that are damaged intraoperatively should be replaced. In ideal conditions, new and reprocessed drill bits can be used for multiple consecutive cases.
Reprocessed drill bits may be as effective as new drill bits, representing potential cost savings for institutions. Both types can be considered for reuse.
我们评估了再处理和损坏的钻头相对于新钻头在所需钻孔力、近皮质和远皮质产生的热量以及可用次数方面的性能。
使用 3 种 3.2mm 钻头(新的、再处理的和损坏的)对 9 对非骨质疏松性人尸体股骨进行了 3 项研究(力、温度和多次可用通过)测试。模拟手术室条件。收集每种类型的力和温度数据。多次通过调查仅测量力。
新的和再处理的钻头在所需的力和产生的热量方面表现相似;两者都优于损坏的钻头。在理想条件下,新钻头和再处理钻头具有相似的可用次数。损坏的钻头需要近 2.6 倍的力才能保持钻孔速度。
就所需的力、产生的热量和可用次数而言,再处理钻头似乎是骨折治疗手术中替代新钻头的可行选择。术中损坏的钻头应更换。在理想条件下,新钻头和再处理钻头可用于多个连续病例。
再处理钻头可能与新钻头一样有效,这代表了机构的潜在成本节约。这两种类型都可以考虑重复使用。