header advert
Results 1 - 2 of 2
Results per page:
Applied filters
General Orthopaedics

Include Proceedings
Dates
Year From

Year To
Orthopaedic Proceedings
Vol. 103-B, Issue SUPP_9 | Pages 7 - 7
1 Jun 2021
Herregodts S Verhaeghe M Gijsels S Herregodts J De Baets P Victor J
Full Access

Introduction

Robot systems have been successfully introduced to improve the accuracy and reduce severe iatrogenic soft tissue damage in knee arthroplasty. Unfortunately to perform complete a complete bone cut, the cutting tool has to slightly pass the edge of the bone. In the posterior zones were retractor protection is impossible this will lead to contact between the cutting tool and the soft tissue envelope. Therefore, complete soft tissue preservation cannot be guaranteed with the current commercial systems.

Methods

This study presents an alternative robotic controlled cutting technique to perform the bone resections during TKA by milling a slot with a long slender high-speed milling tool. The system is composed by a long milling tool driven by a high-speed motor and a protector covering the end of the cutter. The protector is rigidly connected to the motor by the support structure next to the mill, which moves behind the mill in the slot created by the cutter. The protector at the end of the cutter has four functions: providing mechanical support for the mill, preventing soft tissue to come into contact with the cutter, sensing the edge of the bone to accurately follow the shape of the bone and releasing the attached soft tissue. The edge of the bone is sensed by force feedback and with the help of a probing motion the adaptive algorithm enables the protector to follow the edge of the bone closely by compensating for small segmentation and registration errors. A pilot test to evaluate the concept was performed on three fresh frozen knees. The flatness of the resection, the iatrogenic soft tissue damage, the cutting time and the efficiency of the bone contour following algorithm was measured.


Orthopaedic Proceedings
Vol. 98-B, Issue SUPP_10 | Pages 108 - 108
1 May 2016
Verstraete M Herregodts S De Baets P Victor J
Full Access

Introduction

For the evaluation of new orthopaedic implants, cadaveric testing remains an attractive solution. However, prior to cadaveric testing, the performance of an implant can be evaluated using numerical simulations. These simulations can provide insight in the kinematics and contact forces associated with a specific implant design and/or positioning.

Methods

Both a two and three dimensional simulation model have been created using the AnyBody Modelling System (AMS). In the two dimensional model, the knee joint is represented by a hinge. Similarly, the ankle and hip joint are represented by a hinge joint and a variable amplitude quadriceps force is applied to a rigid bar connected to the tibia (Figure 1a). In line with this simulation model, a hinge model was created that could be mounted in the UGent knee simulator to evaluate the performance of the simulated model. The hinge model thereby performs a cyclic motion under varying quadriceps load while recording the ankle reaction forces.

In addition to the two dimensional model, a three dimensional model has been developed (Figure 1b). More specifically, a model is built of a sawbone leg holding a posterior stabilized single radius total knee implant. The physical sawbone model contains simplified medial and lateral collateral ligaments. In line with the boundary conditions of the UGent knee simulator, the simulated hip contains a single rotational degree of freedom and the ankle holds four degrees of freedom (three rotations, single translation). In the simulations, the knee is modelled using the force-dependent kinematics (FDK) method built in the AMS. This leaves the knee with six degrees of freedom that are controlled by the ligament tension in combination with the applied quadriceps load and shape of the implant. The physical sawbone model goes through five cycles in the UGent simulator using while recording the kinematics of the femur and tibia using a set of markers rigidly attached to the femur and tibia bone. The position of the implant with respect to the markers was evaluated by CT-scanning the sawbone model.