应用安全边际算法与EOS成像解释46-48mm MOM关节置换术的MHRA警告

I. Clarke, J. Lazennec
{"title":"应用安全边际算法与EOS成像解释46-48mm MOM关节置换术的MHRA警告","authors":"I. Clarke, J. Lazennec","doi":"10.15438/RR.5.3.115","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The Medical Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency (MHRA June-2015) warned of higher risks with 46-48mm sizes of BHR hip resurfacing arthroplasty (HRA). The most common condemnation of adverse results in MOM bearings has been termed edge loading. We originally developed a margin-of-safety (MOS) algorithm to define edge loading of cups in simulator studies. This method integrated simulator wear-patterns with respect to cup diameters and cup designs. The algorithm’s simplicity lay in the fact that with wear-patterns and rim-profile angles predetermined, the only input required was the cup inclination-angle. The algorithm demonstrated that the margin-of-safety decreased in smaller cups due to the tribo-mechanics of spherical CoCr bearings, a previously unrecognized feature. For the 46mm and 48mm cups highlighted in the MHRA alert, the critical cup inclinations where edge-wear became a risk occurred at 65-66°, revealing an insignificant difference with respect to diameters. The MOS-algorithm also indicated that lower lateral-inclination angles were particularly beneficial, i.e. a 46mm cup positioned at 50° inclination would exhibit a higher margin of safety than either 48mm or 50mm sizes positioned at 55° inclination. This evidence supported clinical studies that recommended BHR cup inclinations up to 50-55° and lower as optimal for reducing metal-ion concentrations. In a patient with normal spine mobility, our EOS imaging demonstrated that the inclination in the 46mm cup steepened by 9° from standing to the seated position while margin-of-safety was reduced by 50%. Our 2nd patient with a stiff spine sat with the same component orientations as in his standing posture. Thus MOM impingement and subluxation in different functional postures may also provoke rim-damage mechanisms. Here the combination of EOS imaging and the MOS-algorithm may aid understanding of such risks. Thus the margin-of-safety algorithm confirmed and helped explained the relative risks in the 46mm and 48mm cups highlighted by the MHRA. The algorithm’s stratification by cup rim-profile, inclination angle and cup diameter may assist the surgeon determine which patients may be more at risk for edge wear with the smaller BHR cups.","PeriodicalId":20884,"journal":{"name":"Reconstructive Review","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2015-10-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"7","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Margin-of-safety Algorithm Used with EOS Imaging to Interpret MHRA Warning for 46-48mm MOM Arthroplasty\",\"authors\":\"I. Clarke, J. Lazennec\",\"doi\":\"10.15438/RR.5.3.115\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The Medical Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency (MHRA June-2015) warned of higher risks with 46-48mm sizes of BHR hip resurfacing arthroplasty (HRA). The most common condemnation of adverse results in MOM bearings has been termed edge loading. We originally developed a margin-of-safety (MOS) algorithm to define edge loading of cups in simulator studies. This method integrated simulator wear-patterns with respect to cup diameters and cup designs. The algorithm’s simplicity lay in the fact that with wear-patterns and rim-profile angles predetermined, the only input required was the cup inclination-angle. The algorithm demonstrated that the margin-of-safety decreased in smaller cups due to the tribo-mechanics of spherical CoCr bearings, a previously unrecognized feature. For the 46mm and 48mm cups highlighted in the MHRA alert, the critical cup inclinations where edge-wear became a risk occurred at 65-66°, revealing an insignificant difference with respect to diameters. The MOS-algorithm also indicated that lower lateral-inclination angles were particularly beneficial, i.e. a 46mm cup positioned at 50° inclination would exhibit a higher margin of safety than either 48mm or 50mm sizes positioned at 55° inclination. This evidence supported clinical studies that recommended BHR cup inclinations up to 50-55° and lower as optimal for reducing metal-ion concentrations. In a patient with normal spine mobility, our EOS imaging demonstrated that the inclination in the 46mm cup steepened by 9° from standing to the seated position while margin-of-safety was reduced by 50%. Our 2nd patient with a stiff spine sat with the same component orientations as in his standing posture. Thus MOM impingement and subluxation in different functional postures may also provoke rim-damage mechanisms. Here the combination of EOS imaging and the MOS-algorithm may aid understanding of such risks. Thus the margin-of-safety algorithm confirmed and helped explained the relative risks in the 46mm and 48mm cups highlighted by the MHRA. The algorithm’s stratification by cup rim-profile, inclination angle and cup diameter may assist the surgeon determine which patients may be more at risk for edge wear with the smaller BHR cups.\",\"PeriodicalId\":20884,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Reconstructive Review\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2015-10-31\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"7\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Reconstructive Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.15438/RR.5.3.115\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Reconstructive Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.15438/RR.5.3.115","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 7

摘要

医疗保健产品监管机构(MHRA)于2015年6月警告46-48mm尺寸的BHR髋关节置换术(HRA)风险较高。最常见的谴责不利结果在MOM轴承已被称为边缘加载。我们最初在模拟器研究中开发了一种安全边际(MOS)算法来定义杯子的边缘载荷。该方法将模拟器磨损模式与杯径和杯形设计相结合。该算法的简单之处在于,磨损模式和边缘轮廓角度都是预先确定的,唯一需要输入的是杯子的倾斜角。该算法表明,由于球形CoCr轴承的摩擦力学,小杯的安全边际减小,这是一个以前未被认识到的特征。对于MHRA警报中突出显示的46mm和48mm的杯形,在65-66°之间的杯形倾斜度会产生边缘磨损的风险,这表明它们的直径差异不显著。mos算法还表明,较低的横向倾角特别有利,即倾角为50°的46mm杯比倾角为55°的48mm或50mm杯具有更高的安全边际。这一证据支持临床研究建议BHR杯的倾斜度达到50-55°或更低是降低金属离子浓度的最佳方法。在一名脊柱活动正常的患者中,我们的EOS成像显示46mm杯的倾斜度从站立到坐姿增加了9°,而安全边缘减少了50%。我们的第二个脊柱僵硬的病人坐着的姿势和他站立时的姿势相同。因此,不同功能姿势的MOM撞击和半脱位也可能引起环损伤机制。在这里,EOS成像和mos算法的结合可能有助于了解此类风险。因此,安全边际算法确认并帮助解释了MHRA强调的46毫米和48毫米杯子的相对风险。该算法根据罩杯边缘轮廓、倾斜角和罩杯直径进行分层,可以帮助外科医生确定哪些患者使用较小的BHR罩杯更容易出现边缘磨损。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Margin-of-safety Algorithm Used with EOS Imaging to Interpret MHRA Warning for 46-48mm MOM Arthroplasty
The Medical Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency (MHRA June-2015) warned of higher risks with 46-48mm sizes of BHR hip resurfacing arthroplasty (HRA). The most common condemnation of adverse results in MOM bearings has been termed edge loading. We originally developed a margin-of-safety (MOS) algorithm to define edge loading of cups in simulator studies. This method integrated simulator wear-patterns with respect to cup diameters and cup designs. The algorithm’s simplicity lay in the fact that with wear-patterns and rim-profile angles predetermined, the only input required was the cup inclination-angle. The algorithm demonstrated that the margin-of-safety decreased in smaller cups due to the tribo-mechanics of spherical CoCr bearings, a previously unrecognized feature. For the 46mm and 48mm cups highlighted in the MHRA alert, the critical cup inclinations where edge-wear became a risk occurred at 65-66°, revealing an insignificant difference with respect to diameters. The MOS-algorithm also indicated that lower lateral-inclination angles were particularly beneficial, i.e. a 46mm cup positioned at 50° inclination would exhibit a higher margin of safety than either 48mm or 50mm sizes positioned at 55° inclination. This evidence supported clinical studies that recommended BHR cup inclinations up to 50-55° and lower as optimal for reducing metal-ion concentrations. In a patient with normal spine mobility, our EOS imaging demonstrated that the inclination in the 46mm cup steepened by 9° from standing to the seated position while margin-of-safety was reduced by 50%. Our 2nd patient with a stiff spine sat with the same component orientations as in his standing posture. Thus MOM impingement and subluxation in different functional postures may also provoke rim-damage mechanisms. Here the combination of EOS imaging and the MOS-algorithm may aid understanding of such risks. Thus the margin-of-safety algorithm confirmed and helped explained the relative risks in the 46mm and 48mm cups highlighted by the MHRA. The algorithm’s stratification by cup rim-profile, inclination angle and cup diameter may assist the surgeon determine which patients may be more at risk for edge wear with the smaller BHR cups.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
2
审稿时长
24 weeks
期刊最新文献
Post-operative outcomes, including opioid utilization and length of stay, following total knee arthroplasty: A retrospective case matched series comparing conventional and robotic-assisted total knee arthroplasty Can Knees be Forgotten 2 Years After Total Knee Arthroplasty? Tranexamic Acid Should be Considered for High Risk Arthroplasty Patients Life Lost Too Soon: Navy Corpsman from Ohio Killed in Afghanistan Attack August 26, 2021 A Literature-Based Resource for the Development of Outpatient Arthroplasty Patient Selection Criteria
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1