Reaming versus broaching in cemented hip arthroplasty
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.1080/00016470510030779Abstract
Introduction We used an experimental hip model to assess the mechanical stability of a hip prosthesis, and compared the femoral medullary canal preparation techniques of reaming and broaching. Methods 15 pairs of cadaveric femora had a simulated replacement, the right femur with a reaming technique and the left with a broaching technique. Both femurs were radiographed to assess component positioning and cement mantle. The femurs were osteotomized 30 days after the procedure. The shear strength of the interface was studied at 4 different levels along an aluminum rod during push-out tests. Results The overall mean value of the interface failure load was 15% lower with the reaming technique (6.5 kN for the reaming technique versus 7.7 kN for the broaching technique; p = 0.02). Interpretation Broaching was superior to reaming for the preparation of the femoral canal, and should be used in order to increase primary stability. Further in vivo studies are required to account for factors such as intramedullary pressure, bleeding and surgical variations, which could not be accounted for in our study.Downloads
Download data is not yet available.
Downloads
Published
2005-01-01
How to Cite
Ioannidis, T. T., Apostolou, C. D., Korres, D. S., Papaletsos, I., Gandaifis, N. D., Panagopoulos, C. N., & Agathocleous, P. E. (2005). Reaming versus broaching in cemented hip arthroplasty. Acta Orthopaedica, 76(3), 326–330. https://doi.org/10.1080/00016470510030779
Issue
Section
Articles
License
Acta Orthopaedica (Scandinavica) content is available freely online as from volume 1, 1930. The journal owner owns the copyright for all material published until volume 80, 2009. As of June 2009, the journal has however been published fully Open Access, meaning the authors retain copyright to their work. As of June 2009, articles have been published under CC-BY-NC or CC-BY licenses, unless otherwise specified.
