Two Different Methods to Measure the Stability of Acetabular Implants: A Comparison Using Artificial Acetabular Models.
Quentin GoossensLeonard Cezar PastravMichiel MulierWim DesmetJos Vander SlotenKathleen DenisPublished in: Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) (2020)
The total number of total hip arthroplasties is increasing every year, and approximately 10% of these surgeries are revisions. New implant design and surgical techniques are evolving quickly and demand accurate preclinical evaluation. The initial stability of cementless implants is one of the main concerns of these preclinical evaluations. A broad range of initial stability test methods is currently used, which can be categorized into two main groups: Load-to-failure tests and relative micromotion measurements. Measuring relative micromotion between implant and bone is recognized as the golden standard for implant stability testing as this micromotion is directly linked to the long-term fixation of cementless implants. However, specific custom-made set-ups are required to measure this micromotion, with the result that numerous studies opt to perform more straightforward load-to-failure tests. A custom-made micromotion test set-up for artificial acetabular bone models was developed and used to compare load-to-failure (implant push-out test) with micromotion and to assess the influence of bone material properties and press-fit on the implant stability. The results showed a high degree of correlation between micromotion and load-to-failure stability metrics, which indicates that load-to-failure stability tests can be an appropriate estimator of the primary stability of acetabular implants. Nevertheless, micromotions still apply as the golden standard and are preferred when high accuracy is necessary. Higher bone density resulted in an increase in implant stability. An increase of press-fit from 0.7 mm to 1.2 mm did not significantly increase implant stability.