Impaction bone grafting: a laboratory comparison of two methods

J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2011 Aug;93(8):1049-53. doi: 10.1302/0301-620X.93B8.26819.

Abstract

In revision total hip replacement, bone loss can be managed by impacting porous bone chips. In order to guarantee sufficient mechanical strength, the bone chips have to be compacted. The aim of this study was to determine in an in vitro simulation whether the use of a pneumatic hammer leads to higher primary stability than manual impaction. Bone mass characteristics were measured by force and distance variation of a penetrating punch, which was lowered into a plastic cup filled with bone chips. From these measurements bulk density, contact stiffness, impaction hardness and penetration resistance were calculated for different durations of impaction. We found that the pneumatic method reached higher values of impaction hardness, contact stiffness and bulk density suggesting an increase in stability of the implant. No significant differences were found between the two different methods concerning the penetration resistance. The pneumatic method might reduce the risk of fracture in vivo, as force peaks are smaller and applied for a shorter period. Results from manual impaction showed higher variability and depend much on the experience of the surgeon. The pneumatic hammer is a suitable tool to standardise the impaction process.

Publication types

  • Comparative Study

MeSH terms

  • Acetabulum / surgery
  • Arthroplasty, Replacement, Hip / methods*
  • Bone Density
  • Bone Transplantation / methods*
  • Elasticity
  • Femur Head / physiopathology
  • Femur Head / surgery
  • Hardness
  • Humans
  • Particle Size
  • Reoperation / methods
  • Stress, Mechanical