Severity: Warning
Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests
Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line Number: 176
Backtrace:
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3122
Function: getPubMedXML
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword
File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once
Background: Although short-term outcomes of reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (rTSA) remain promising, the most commonly cited complication remains prosthetic instability. A retentive rTSA liner is commonly used to increase system constraint; however, no studies have evaluated the rate of polyethylene wear. Our hypothesis was that more constrained retentive liners would have higher wear rates than nonretentive liners.
Methods: Six nonretentive and six retentive rTSA non-cross-linked polyethylene liners were subjected to 4.5 million cycles of alternating cycles of abduction-adduction and flexion-extension motion loading profiles. The rTSA liners were assessed for gravimetric wear loss, 3-dimensional volumetric loss by novel micro-computed tomography analysis, and particulate wear debris analysis.
Results: Volumetric wear rates were significant at 7 specific time points (1.0, 2.0, 2.5, 3.25, 3.75, 4.0, and 4.5 million cycles) throughout testing between nonretentive and retentive liners; however, overall mean volumetric wear rate was not statistically significant (P = .076). Total volume loss between liner test groups was found to be significant starting after 3.5 million cycles of testing. Maximum and mean surface deviations were found to be larger for retentive liners vs. nonretentive liners by micro-computed tomography analysis across the entire articulation surface.
Discussion And Conclusion: Retentive liners undergo significantly greater volume loss and greater surface deviation compared with nonretentive liners, most notably at later time points representing extended implantation times. Additional stability afforded by retentive liners should be balanced against the potential for increased wear and potential for subsequent polyethylene wear-induced aseptic loosening.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jse.2015.02.016 | DOI Listing |
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!