Abstract
Aims
Accurate and precise acetabular reaming is a requirement for the press-fit stability of cementless acetabular hip replacement components. The accuracy of reaming depends on the reamer, the reaming technique and the bone quality. Conventional reamers wear with use resulting in inaccurate reaming diameters, whilst the theoretical beneficial effect of ‘whirlwind’ reaming over straight reaming has not previously been documented. Our aim was to compare the accuracy and precision of single use additively-manufactured reamers with new conventional reamers and to compare the effect of different acetabular reaming techniques.
Materials and Methods
Forty composite bone models, half high-density and half low-density, were reamed with a new 61 mm conventional acetabular reamer using either straight or ‘whirlwind’ reaming techniques. This was repeated with a 61 mm single use additively-manufactured reamer. Reamed cavities were scanned using a 3D laser scanner with mean diameters of reamed cavities compared using the Mann-Whitney U test to determine any statistically significant differences between groups (p<0.05) [Fig. 1).
Results
Reaming errors were significantly higher in low-density bone compared to high-density bone for both reamer types and reaming techniques tested (61.9 mm (SD 0.7) vs 61.4 mm (SD 0.4), respectively; p=0.0045). Whirlwind reaming was significantly more accurate and precise than straight reaming using both conventional (61.3 mm (SD 0.1) vs 62.3 mm (SD 0.4), respectively; p<0.0001) and single use reamers (61.1 mm (SD 0.3) vs 61.7 mm (SD 0.7), respectively; p=0.0058) [Fig. 2]. The novel single use reamer was significantly more accurate than the unused conventional reamer, using both the straight (61.7 mm (SD 0.7) vs 62.4 mm (SD 0.4), respectively; p=0.0011) and whirlwind techniques (61.2 mm (SD 0.3) vs 61.3 mm (SD 0.1), respectively; p=0.0002) [Fig. 3].
Conclusion
This is the first study to our knowledge that has assessed acetabular reaming technique in both low and high density saw bones. Improved reaming accuracy and precision was seen in both devices tested when using the ‘whirlwind’ technique in both high-density and low-density bone models when compared to a straight reaming technique. The single use device assessed reamed a cavity size closer to its stated size (61mm) compared to conventional reamers. Based on this study we suggest using a careful “whirlwind” technique when performing acetabular reaming, and for the surgeon to pay particular attention when performing joint replacement in patients with reduced bone quality as there is likely to be more variability in acetabular reaming accuracy in these patients.
