Journal of shoulder and elbow surgery · 2011
Vacuum assist glenoid fixation: does this technique lead to a more durable glenoid component?
СтатьяРандомизированное исследованиеНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Gross R Michael, High Robin, Apker Kimberly, Haggstrom John, Fehringer Jennifer Allen, Stephan Jill
Аннотация
INTRODUCTION: This was a prospective random study to determine if suction applied to the glenoid vault through the coracoid process would facilitate deeper penetration of cement into the vault, and if deeper penetration would lead to a more durable glenoid component.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: A group of 96 patients were randomly assigned to 1 of 2 pathways for glenoid fixation. One was cemented using modern "third generation" cementing techniques, while the second group utilizes these same steps as well as a vacuum assist (weep-hole) technique. We measured the "amount" of cement that penetrated the vault around either a pegged or keeled component as a function of the area of the cement noted on the fluoroscopic AP film that was taken 35.1 months postoperatively. We were able to determine the area of this irregular shape by using a program that was specifically written for the study. The films were evaluated by the senior author, as well as 2 musculoskeletal trained radiologists blind to the technique.
RESULTS: The area of the cement mantle was found to be significantly larger (P < .005) in the group with the vacuum assist technique. There was a positive relationship between the durability of the cement mantle as determined by the presence and the extent of radiolucent lines and the size of the cement mantle (P < .001).
CONCLUSION: If a cement technique is chosen to implant a glenoid component, the vacuum assist weep-hole technique is the most effective cementing technique to achieve durable fixation.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: A group of 96 patients were randomly assigned to 1 of 2 pathways for glenoid fixation. One was cemented using modern "third generation" cementing techniques, while the second group utilizes these same steps as well as a vacuum assist (weep-hole) technique. We measured the "amount" of cement that penetrated the vault around either a pegged or keeled component as a function of the area of the cement noted on the fluoroscopic AP film that was taken 35.1 months postoperatively. We were able to determine the area of this irregular shape by using a program that was specifically written for the study. The films were evaluated by the senior author, as well as 2 musculoskeletal trained radiologists blind to the technique.
RESULTS: The area of the cement mantle was found to be significantly larger (P < .005) in the group with the vacuum assist technique. There was a positive relationship between the durability of the cement mantle as determined by the presence and the extent of radiolucent lines and the size of the cement mantle (P < .001).
CONCLUSION: If a cement technique is chosen to implant a glenoid component, the vacuum assist weep-hole technique is the most effective cementing technique to achieve durable fixation.