header advert
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

General Orthopaedics

THE EFFECT OF INTERFERENCE FIT ON PRIMARY STABILITY OF CEMENTLESS TOTAL KNEE ARTHROPLASTY TIBIAL COMPONENTS

International Society for Technology in Arthroplasty (ISTA) meeting, New Early-Career Webinar Series (NEWS), held online, November 2020.



Abstract

Introduction

Cementless total knee arthroplasty (TKA) implants use an interference fit to achieve fixation, which depends on the difference between the inner dimensions of the implant and outer dimensions of the bone. However, the most optimal interference fit is still unclear. A higher interference fit could lead to a superior fixation, but it could also cause bone abrasion and permanent deformation during implantation. Therefore, this study aims to investigate the effect of increasing the interference fit from 350 µm to 700 µm on the primary stability of cementless tibial implants by measuring micromotions and gaps at the bone-implant interface when subjected to two loading conditions.

Methods

Two cementless e.motion® tibial components (Total Knee System, B. Braun) with different interference fit and surface coating were implanted in six pairs of relatively young human cadaver tibias (47–60 years). The Orthoload peak loads of gait (1960N) and squat (1935N) were applied to the specimens with a custom made load applicator (Figure 1A). The micromotions (shear displacement) and opening/closing gaps (normal displacement) were measured with Digital Image Correlation (DIC) in 6 different regions of interest (ROIs - Figure 1B). Two General Linear Mixed Models (GLMMs) were created with micromotions and interfacial gaps as dependent variables, bone quality, loading conditions, ROIs, and interference fit implants as independent variables, and the cadaver specimens as subject variables.

Results

No significant difference was found for the micromotions between the two interference fit implants (gait p=0.755, squat p=0.232), nor for interfacial gaps (gait p=0.474, squat p=0.269). In contrast, significant differences were found for the ROIs in the two dependent variables (p < 0.001). The micromotions in the anterior ROIs (AM and AL) showed fewer micromotions for the low interference fit implant (Figure 2). More closing gaps (negative values) were seen for all ROIs (Figure 3), except in AM ROI during squat, which showed opening gaps (positive values). The posterior ROIs (PM and PL) showed more closing than seen in the anterior ROIs (AM and AL) for both loading configurations.

Discussion

The results presented here demonstrate that increasing the interference fit from 350 µm to 700 µm does not affect the micromotions at the implant-bone interface of tibial TKA. While micromotions values were all below the threshold for bone ingrowth (40 µm), closing gaps were quite substantial (∼−150 µm). Since cementless e.motion® TKA components with an interference fit of 350 µm had shown a survival rate of 96.2% after 8.3 years postoperatively, interfacial gaps can be expected to be within a threshold value that can guarantee good primary stability. Moreover, increasing the interference fit to 700 µm can be considered a good range for an interference fit.

For any figures or tables, please contact the authors directly.