Durability and strength of steinmann pin augmentation in cemented tibial defects

R Randall, K. N. Weenig, J. R. West, J. O. Johnston, K. N. Bachus

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

12 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

It has been argued that Steinmann pin augmentation does not improve the biomechanics of polymethylmethacrylate reconstruction for massive defects of bone. The current authors investigated whether pin augmentation of polymethylmethacrylate in the reconstruction of noncontained defects of bone improved the biomechanical properties of the reconstruction as compared with polymethylmethacrylate alone when minimal or large bone porosity is present. Large noncontained defects were created in 10 pairs of human tibias. In Group 1, five left tibias had reconstruction with polymethylmethacrylate augmented with three, 5-mm diameter by 10-mm deep holes into lateral condyle cancellous bone. Right tibias had identical reconstruction with three, 3/16-inch threaded pins placed into the medullary canal. In Group 2, three, 10mm diameter by 10-mm deep holes were created in both pairs. The left tibia had polymethylmethacrylate reconstruction and the right tibia had polymethylmethacrylate and pin augmentation. Specimens were subjected to 2000 compressive cycles then loaded to failure. In Group 1, cycles and load to failure were significantly lower in reconstructions without pins compared with reconstructions with pins. No significant difference was observed between reconstruction techniques in Group 2. In reconstructions without pins, large diameter holes had significantly better cyclical durability. Pins improved survival compared with no pins.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)306-314
Number of pages9
JournalClinical Orthopaedics and Related Research
Issue number397
DOIs
StatePublished - Jan 1 2002
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Polymethyl Methacrylate
Tibia
Bone and Bones
Porosity
Biomechanical Phenomena
Survival

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Orthopedics and Sports Medicine

Cite this

Durability and strength of steinmann pin augmentation in cemented tibial defects. / Randall, R; Weenig, K. N.; West, J. R.; Johnston, J. O.; Bachus, K. N.

In: Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research, No. 397, 01.01.2002, p. 306-314.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Randall, R ; Weenig, K. N. ; West, J. R. ; Johnston, J. O. ; Bachus, K. N. / Durability and strength of steinmann pin augmentation in cemented tibial defects. In: Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research. 2002 ; No. 397. pp. 306-314.
@article{f4765cefaaa040cc8c73838d6b2f5a23,
title = "Durability and strength of steinmann pin augmentation in cemented tibial defects",
abstract = "It has been argued that Steinmann pin augmentation does not improve the biomechanics of polymethylmethacrylate reconstruction for massive defects of bone. The current authors investigated whether pin augmentation of polymethylmethacrylate in the reconstruction of noncontained defects of bone improved the biomechanical properties of the reconstruction as compared with polymethylmethacrylate alone when minimal or large bone porosity is present. Large noncontained defects were created in 10 pairs of human tibias. In Group 1, five left tibias had reconstruction with polymethylmethacrylate augmented with three, 5-mm diameter by 10-mm deep holes into lateral condyle cancellous bone. Right tibias had identical reconstruction with three, 3/16-inch threaded pins placed into the medullary canal. In Group 2, three, 10mm diameter by 10-mm deep holes were created in both pairs. The left tibia had polymethylmethacrylate reconstruction and the right tibia had polymethylmethacrylate and pin augmentation. Specimens were subjected to 2000 compressive cycles then loaded to failure. In Group 1, cycles and load to failure were significantly lower in reconstructions without pins compared with reconstructions with pins. No significant difference was observed between reconstruction techniques in Group 2. In reconstructions without pins, large diameter holes had significantly better cyclical durability. Pins improved survival compared with no pins.",
author = "R Randall and Weenig, {K. N.} and West, {J. R.} and Johnston, {J. O.} and Bachus, {K. N.}",
year = "2002",
month = "1",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1097/00003086-200204000-00035",
language = "English (US)",
pages = "306--314",
journal = "Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research",
issn = "0009-921X",
publisher = "Springer New York",
number = "397",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Durability and strength of steinmann pin augmentation in cemented tibial defects

AU - Randall, R

AU - Weenig, K. N.

AU - West, J. R.

AU - Johnston, J. O.

AU - Bachus, K. N.

PY - 2002/1/1

Y1 - 2002/1/1

N2 - It has been argued that Steinmann pin augmentation does not improve the biomechanics of polymethylmethacrylate reconstruction for massive defects of bone. The current authors investigated whether pin augmentation of polymethylmethacrylate in the reconstruction of noncontained defects of bone improved the biomechanical properties of the reconstruction as compared with polymethylmethacrylate alone when minimal or large bone porosity is present. Large noncontained defects were created in 10 pairs of human tibias. In Group 1, five left tibias had reconstruction with polymethylmethacrylate augmented with three, 5-mm diameter by 10-mm deep holes into lateral condyle cancellous bone. Right tibias had identical reconstruction with three, 3/16-inch threaded pins placed into the medullary canal. In Group 2, three, 10mm diameter by 10-mm deep holes were created in both pairs. The left tibia had polymethylmethacrylate reconstruction and the right tibia had polymethylmethacrylate and pin augmentation. Specimens were subjected to 2000 compressive cycles then loaded to failure. In Group 1, cycles and load to failure were significantly lower in reconstructions without pins compared with reconstructions with pins. No significant difference was observed between reconstruction techniques in Group 2. In reconstructions without pins, large diameter holes had significantly better cyclical durability. Pins improved survival compared with no pins.

AB - It has been argued that Steinmann pin augmentation does not improve the biomechanics of polymethylmethacrylate reconstruction for massive defects of bone. The current authors investigated whether pin augmentation of polymethylmethacrylate in the reconstruction of noncontained defects of bone improved the biomechanical properties of the reconstruction as compared with polymethylmethacrylate alone when minimal or large bone porosity is present. Large noncontained defects were created in 10 pairs of human tibias. In Group 1, five left tibias had reconstruction with polymethylmethacrylate augmented with three, 5-mm diameter by 10-mm deep holes into lateral condyle cancellous bone. Right tibias had identical reconstruction with three, 3/16-inch threaded pins placed into the medullary canal. In Group 2, three, 10mm diameter by 10-mm deep holes were created in both pairs. The left tibia had polymethylmethacrylate reconstruction and the right tibia had polymethylmethacrylate and pin augmentation. Specimens were subjected to 2000 compressive cycles then loaded to failure. In Group 1, cycles and load to failure were significantly lower in reconstructions without pins compared with reconstructions with pins. No significant difference was observed between reconstruction techniques in Group 2. In reconstructions without pins, large diameter holes had significantly better cyclical durability. Pins improved survival compared with no pins.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0036233813&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0036233813&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1097/00003086-200204000-00035

DO - 10.1097/00003086-200204000-00035

M3 - Article

C2 - 11953622

AN - SCOPUS:0036233813

SP - 306

EP - 314

JO - Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research

JF - Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research

SN - 0009-921X

IS - 397

ER -