Abstract
In vitro femoral studies have demonstrated the addition of hydroxyapatite (HA), to morcellised bone graft (MBG) decreases femoral prosthesis subsidence. However, with an increased risk of femoral fracture during the impaction of a MBG:HA mixture, possibly due to greater force transmission to the femoral cortex via the HA. The aim was to compare the hoop strains and subsidence of a 1:1 mixture of MBG:HA with pure bone allograft during impaction and subsequent endurance testing in a revision hip arthroplasty model.
Materials and methods Large Sawbone femurs were prepared to represent a femur with bone loss (Sawbones, Sweden). 12 uniaxial strain gauges were attached to each femur at 0, 90, 180 and 270 degrees, at distal, midshaft, proximal points to measure hoop strain. Impaction grafting was performed using X-Change 2 instruments and an Instron servohydaulic machine for 2 distal impactions and 4 proximal impactions for 60 impactions each.
Study groups
The study consisted of four experimental groups: 1)Pure MBG, force of 1.98 kN 2)Pure MBG, force 3.63kN. 3)1:1 mixture of MBG: porous HA (pHA), 4)1:1 mixture MBG: non porous HA (npHA). 6 samples of each group were performed.
Endurance testing
The potted femur was loaded in a manner representing the walking cycle (1.98kN) at 1 Hz for 50 000 cycles. The displacement of the femoral head during loading was measured by two displacement transducers (LVDT) were mounted on aluminum brackets to measure vertical displacement and rotation.
Statistical analysis
Statistical analysis was performed using a Mann – Whitney U test for total subsidence and prosthesis cyclical movement at 6 hours between the control MBG1.98 and the other experimental groups. Subsequent analysis compared pHA and npHA mixes with and HA to MBG3. 65kN. Level of significance was taken at p<0.05.
Results
Distal strain gauges:
All experimental groups had a significantly greater distal hoop strain than MBG1.98 kN (p=0.004)
Middle strain gauges:
No significant differences between the HA groups and MBG1.98. MBG3.65 was significantly greater (p=0.02)
Top strain gauges:
No significant differences, p=0.9. Endurance testing There was a non significant trend towards decreased subsidence in the HA groups compared to the bone groups. (p=0.7) but significantly less cyclical subsidence between HA groups and MBG 1.98 (p=0.02). No difference between the MBG 3.65 kN and HA groups for the cyclical subsidence. Statistically significant difference in cyclical rotation between both the MBG1.98 and the pHA (p=0.02) and npHA(p=0.02) and the bone 3.65 and pHA and npHA groups(p=0.04).
Conclusion
The addition of HA to MBG decreases total and cyclical subsidence. There were significantly greater hoop strains in the distal and midshaft strain gauges with greater impaction force and in the distal gauges with the use of HA. Endurance testing demonstrated a significant decrease in cyclical motion and cyclical rotational stability of the prosthesis with a trend to a decrease in total subsidence during endurance testing with HA groups. The addition of HA might have longer term benefits in terms of prosthesis stability and subsequent graft healing but caution is needed during impaction.
