Laboratory of Biomechanics and Implant Research, Clinic for Orthopedics and Trauma Surgery, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany.
Laboratory of Biomechanics and Implant Research, Clinic for Orthopedics and Trauma Surgery, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany.
Knee. 2021 Dec;33:185-192. doi: 10.1016/j.knee.2021.09.010. Epub 2021 Oct 9.
Aseptic loosening remains one of the most common causes of revision of the tibial component for total knee arthroplasty. A stable bond between implant and cement is essential for appropriate long-term results. The aim of our in vitro study was to investigate the maximum failure load of tibial ATTUNE prosthesis design alternatives compared with a previous design. In addition, cement-in-cement revision was considered as a potential strategy after tibial component debonding.
The experimental investigations of the maximum failure load of the implant-cement interface were performed under optimal conditions, without potential contamination. We compared the designs of the tibial components of the ATTUNE, ATTUNE S+ and P.F.C. Sigma. In addition, we investigated the cement-in-cement revision for the ATTUNE knee system replacing it with an ATTUNE S+.
The maximum failure load showed no significant difference between P.F.C. Sigma and ATTUNE groups (P = 0.087), but there was a significant difference between the P.F.C. Sigma and the ATTUNE S+ groups (P < 0.001). The analysis also showed a significant difference (P < 0.001) between the ATTUNE and the ATTUNE S+ groups for the maximum failure load. The ATTUNE S+ cement-in-cement revision group showed a significant higher failure load (P < 0.001) compared with the P.F.C. Sigma and ATTUNE groups. No significant differences (P = 1.000) were found between the ATTUNE S+ cement-in-cement and ATTUNE S+ group.
Based on these results, we found no design-specific evidence of increased debonding risk with the ATTUNE and ATTUNE S+ components compared with the P.F.C Sigma. Furthermore, the cement-in-cement revision seems to be an alternative for the revision surgery.
无菌性松动仍然是全膝关节置换术胫骨部件翻修的最常见原因之一。植入物和水泥之间的稳定结合对于获得适当的长期效果至关重要。本体外研究的目的是比较 ATTUNE 假体设计替代方案与先前设计的胫骨部件的最大失效负荷。此外,考虑到在胫骨部件脱粘后,水泥-水泥翻修是一种潜在的策略。
在无潜在污染的最佳条件下进行植入物-水泥界面最大失效负荷的实验研究。我们比较了 ATTUNE、ATTUNE S+ 和 P.F.C. Sigma 胫骨部件的设计。此外,我们还研究了 ATTUNE 膝关节系统的水泥-水泥翻修,用 ATTUNE S+ 来替代它。
P.F.C. Sigma 和 ATTUNE 组之间的最大失效负荷没有显著差异(P=0.087),但 P.F.C. Sigma 和 ATTUNE S+ 组之间有显著差异(P<0.001)。分析还显示,ATTUNE 和 ATTUNE S+ 组之间的最大失效负荷有显著差异(P<0.001)。ATTUNE S+ 水泥-水泥翻修组的失效负荷明显高于 P.F.C. Sigma 和 ATTUNE 组(P<0.001)。ATTUNE S+ 水泥-水泥和 ATTUNE S+ 组之间没有显著差异(P=1.000)。
根据这些结果,我们没有发现 ATTUNE 和 ATTUNE S+ 组件与 P.F.C Sigma 相比有增加脱粘风险的设计特异性证据。此外,水泥-水泥翻修似乎是翻修手术的一种替代方法。