Advertisement for orthosearch.org.uk
Orthopaedic Proceedings Logo

Receive monthly Table of Contents alerts from Orthopaedic Proceedings

Comprehensive article alerts can be set up and managed through your account settings

View my account settings

Visit Orthopaedic Proceedings at:

Loading...

Loading...

Full Access

TRUE HEMISPHERIC OR PERIPHERALLY ENHANCED? IN VITRO ANALYSIS OF THE PRIMARY STABILITY OF TWO UNCEMENTED ACETABULAR PRESS-FIT CUPS



Abstract

Introduction: The geometry of uncemented press-fit ace-tabular cups is important in achieving primary stability to ensure bony ingrowth. This study compares the in vitro primary stability of two widely used designs.

Methods: The primary stability of two uncemented ace-tabular cup designs (true hemispheric and peripherally enhanced) with the same 52mm diameter and produced by the same manufacturer, was tested in vitro. Polyethylene blocks of low and high density -representing softer and harder bone- were reamed using the manufacturers’ reamers. The cups were seated using an Instron 5800R machine. Peak failure loads and moments during uniaxial pull-out and tangential lever-out tests were used as measures of primary stability. Eighty tests were performed.

Results: Low density substrate: no difference between the two designs for seating force or stability, with the substrate under-reamed by 2mm.

High density substrate: the cups could not be adequately seated with a 2mm under-ream. Seating was achieved with 1mm under-ream for the hemispheric and 1mm over-ream for the peripherally enhanced design. There was a statistically significant difference in seating forces, with the hemispheric cup requiring less force (6264±1535N vs 7858±2383N, p< 0.05). There was a statistically significant difference in the stability ratio of pull-out force to seating force, favouring the hemispheric cup.

Discussion: No difference was seen in the low density substrate between the 2 cups.

In the high density, the hemispheric design had better characteristics (lower seating force and higher pull-out force to seating force ratio) than the peripherally enhanced design, which are more favourable in clinical settings.

Correspondence should be addressed to BHS c/o BOA, at the Royal College of Surgeons, 35–43 Lincoln’s Inn Fields, London, WC2A 3PE, England.