One step closer into the design of fall protective device for individuals fitted with a bone-anchored prosthesis

The consequences of falls are often dreadful for individuals with lower limb amputation using bone-anchored prosthesis.[1-5] Typically, the impact on the fixation is responsible for bending the intercutaneous piece that could lead to a complete breakage over time. .[3, 5-8] The surgical replacement of this piece is possible but complex and expensive. Clearly, there is a need for solid data enabling an evidence-based design of protective devices limiting impact forces and torsion applied during a fall. The impact on the fixation during an actual fall is obviously difficult to record during a scientific experiment.[6, 8-13] Consequently, Schwartze and colleagues opted for one of the next best options science has to offer: simulation with an able-bodied participant. They recorded body movements and knee impacts on the floor while mimicking several plausible falling scenarios. Then, they calculated the forces and moments that would be applied at four levels along the femur corresponding to amputation heights.[6, 8-11, 14-25] The overall forces applied during the falls were similar regardless of the amputation height indicating that the impact forces were simply translated along the femur. As expected, they showed that overall moments generally increased with amputation height due to changes in lever arm. This work demonstrates that devices preventing only against force overload do not require considering amputation height while those protecting against bending moments should. Another significant contribution is to provide, for the time, the magnitude of the impact load during different falls. This loading range is crucial to the overall design and, more precisely, the triggering threshold of protective devices. Unfortunately, the analysis of only a single able-bodied participant replicating falls limits greatly the generalisation of the findings. Nonetheless, this case study is an important milestone contributing to a better understanding of load impact during a fall. This new knowledge will improve the treatment, the safe ambulation and, ultimately, the quality of life of individuals fitted with bone-anchored prosthesis.

Bone-anchored prosthesis: Evidence that “gains” overcome the “pain”

Most of socket related discomforts leading to a significant decrease in quality of life of individuals with limb amputation can be overcome by surgical techniques enabling bone-anchored prostheses. To date, the OPRA two-stage procedure (i.e., S1, S2) is the most acknowledged treatment. However, surgical implantations of osseointegrated fixations are developing at an unprecedented pace worldwide.[1-18] Clearly, this option is becoming accessible to a wide range of individuals with limb amputations. The team led by Dr Rickard Branemark has published a number of landmark articles each focusing on a particular aspect (e.g., health related quality of life, functional outcomes, bone remodelling, infection rate). [1-3, 19-32] However, evidences presented in this prospective study are remarkable. Functional outcome, health-related quality of life and complications were considered concurrently for a large population (i.e., 51 participants) over an extended period of time (i.e., up to year follow up). Therefore, the “gain” and “pain” of the whole procedure were truly contrasted for the first time. The results confirmed that OPRA surgical and rehabilitation procedures improved significantly prosthetic use, mobility, global situation and fewer problems. Furthermore, the authors reported 47 episodes of infections for 63% (32) participants between post-op S1 and two years follow up. A total of 87% (41) were superficial infections recorded for 28 participants between post-op S2 and two years follow up, while 13% (6) were deep infections occurring for 4 participants during post-op S1 and S2. As expected, post-op S2 phase was the most prone to both infections. More importantly, the vast majority of infections were effectively treated with oral antibiotics. Clearly, this study provided definitive evidence that the benefits of OPRA fixation overcome complications. This article is also establishing reporting standards and benchmark data for future studies focusing on bone-anchored prostheses.

Bone-anchored prosthesis: Update in international developments

This symposium will provide hand-on update on the current development of the load sensors measuring the inner prosthetic loading that can strongly contribute the ever increasing demand for evidence-based clinical practice. Surgical implantations of osseointegrated fixations for bone-anchored prosthesis are developing at an unprecedented pace worldwide (e.g., Australia, UK, Sweden, US). This option is becoming accessible to a wide range of individuals with limb loss. With these new developments come new potential challenges and opportunities for all the stakeholders involved in the prosthetic care of these patients. Clearly, there is a need for those stakeholders, particularly those attending the ISPO, to be informed of the current and upcoming international developments in bone-anchored prostheses. The objectives of this symposium will be: • To present an overview of the current growth of the procedures worldwide (e.g., identification of key players, centers of activities, growth trend) with a strong focus on the introduction of the framework to evaluate the availability of the procedure at national level (e.g., number of patients treated, range of the levels of implantation, number of commercial fixations accessible), • To provide first-hand updates on the latest cutting-edge scientific and clinical developments of fixations and rehabilitations programs (e.g., Innovative design of implant, cost-effectiveness, long-terms rehabilitation outcomes for screw-type fixation, current developments in US, comparative analysis for press-fit type of implant, potential moves toward single-stage surgeries).

The cost and time effectiveness of osseointegration compared to the traditional socket prosthesis

Individuals with limb amputation fitted with conventional socket-suspended prostheses often experience socket related discomfort leading to a significant decrease in quality of life.[1-14] Most of these concerns can be overcome with osseointegration, a direct skeletal fixation method where the prosthetic componentry are directly attached to the fixation, resulting in the redundancy of the traditional socket system. There are two stages of osseointegration; Stage one, a titanium implant is inserted into the marrow space of residual limb bone and Stage two, a titanium extension is attached to the fixture. This surgical procedure is currently blooming worldwide, particularly within Queensland. Whilst providing improvements in quality of life, this new method also has potential to minimise the cost required for an amputee to ambulate during daily living. Thus, the aim of this project was to compare the differences in mean cost of services, cost of componentry and labour hours when using osseointegration compared to traditional socket-based prostheses. Data were extracted from Queensland Artificial Limb Services (QALS) database to determine cost of services, type of services and labour hours required to maintain a prosthetic limb. Five trans-femoral amputee male participants (age 46.4±10.1 yrs; height 175.4±16.3 cm; mass 83.8±14.0 kg; time since second stage 22.0± 8.1 mths) met inclusion criteria which was patient had to be more than 12 months post stage two osseointegration procedure. The socket and osseointegration prosthesis variables examined were the mean hours of labour, mean cost of services and mean cost of prosthetic componentry. Statistical analyses were conducted using an ANOVA. The results identified that there were only significant differences in the number of labour hours (p = 0.005) and cost of services (p = 0.021) when comparing the socket and osseointegration prosthetic type. These results identified that the cost of componentry were comparable between the two methods.

Rehabilitation of individuals with bone-anchored prosthesis: State-of-the-art and challenges

Individuals with limb amputation fitted with conventional socket-suspended prostheses often experience socket-related discomfort leading to a significant decrease in quality of life. Bone-anchored prostheses are increasingly acknowledged as viable alternative method of attachment of artificial limb. In this case, the prosthesis is attached directly to the residual skeleton through a percutaneous fixation. To date, a few osseointegration fixations are commercially available. Several devices are at different stages of development particularly in Europe and the US.[1-15] Clearly, surgical procedures are currently blooming worldwide. Indeed, Australia and Queensland in particular have one of the fastest growing populations. Previous studies involving either screw-type implants or press-fit fixations for bone-anchorage have focused on fragmented biomechanics aspects as well as the clinical benefits and safety of the procedure. However, very few publications have synthetized this information and provided an overview of the current developments in bone-anchored prostheses worldwide, let alone in Australia. The purposes of the presentation will be: 1. To provide an overview of the state-of-art developments in bone-anchored prostheses with as strong emphasis on the design of fixations, treatment, benefits, risks as well as future opportunities and challenges, 2. To present the current international developments of procedures for bone-anchored prostheses in terms of numbers of centers, number of cases and typical case-mix, 3. To highlight the current role Australia is playing as a leader worldwide in terms of growing population, broadest range of case-mix, choices of fixations, development of reimbursement schemes, unique clinical outcome registry for evidence-based practice, cutting-edge research, consumer demand and general public interest.

Cost-effectiveness of bone-anchored prosthesis: the Queensland experience

Individuals with limb amputation fitted with conventional socket-suspended prostheses often experience socket-related discomfort leading to a significant decrease in quality of life. Bone-anchored prostheses are increasingly acknowledged as viable alternative method of attachment of artificial limb. In this case, the prosthesis is attached directly to the residual skeleton through a percutaneous fixation. To date, a few osseointegration fixations are commercially available. Several devices are at different stages of development particularly in Europe and the US. [1-15] Clearly, surgical procedures are currently blooming worldwide. Indeed, Australia and Queensland, in particular, have one of the fastest growing populations. Previous studies involving either screw-type implants or press-fit fixations for bone-anchorage have focused on biomechanics aspects as well as the clinical benefits and safety of the procedure. In principle, bone-anchored prostheses should eliminate lifetime expenses associated with sockets and, consequently, potentially alleviate the financial burden of amputation for governmental organizations. Unfortunately, publications focusing on cost-effectiveness are sparse. In fact, only one study published by Haggstrom et al (2012), reported that “despite significantly fewer visits for prosthetic service the annual mean costs for osseointegrated prostheses were comparable with socket-suspended prostheses”. Consequently, governmental organizations such as Queensland Artificial Limb Services (QALS) are facing a number of challenges while adjusting financial assistance schemes that should be fair and equitable to their clients fitted with bone-anchored prostheses. Clearly, more scientific evidence extracted from governmental databases is needed to further consolidate the analyses of financial burden associated with both methods of attachment (i.e., conventional sockets prostheses, bone-anchored prostheses). The purpose of the presentation will be to share the current outcomes of a cost-analysis study lead by QALS. The specific objectives will be: • To outline methodological avenues to assess the cost-effectiveness of bone-anchored prostheses compared to conventional sockets prostheses, • To highlight the potential obstacles and limitations in cost-effectiveness analyses of bone-anchored prostheses, • To present cohort results of a cost-effectiveness (QALY vs cost) including the determination of fair Incremental cost-effectiveness Ratios (ICER) as well as cost-benefit analysis focusing on the comparing costs and key outcome indicators (e.g., QTFA, TUG, 6MWT, activities of daily living) over QALS funding cycles for both methods of attachment.

Health-related quality of life of individuals with transfemoral amputation fitted with the Transcutaneous Bone Anchoring Prosthesis following the OGAAP

Background The benefits and safety transcutaneous bone anchored prosthesis relying on a screw fixation are well reported.[1-17] However, most of the studies on press-fit implants and joint replacement technology have focused on surgical techniques.[3, 18-23] One European centre using this technique has reported on health related quality of life (HRQOL) for a group of individuals with transfemoral amputation (TFA).[3] Data from other centres are needed to assess the effectiveness of the technique in different settings. Aim This study aimed at reporting HRQOL data at baseline and up to 2-year follow-up for a group of TFAs treated by Osseointegration Group of Australia who followed the Osseointegration Group of Australia Accelerated Protocol (OGAAP), in Sydney between 08/12/2011 and 09/04/2014. Method A total of 16 TFAs (7 females and 9 males, age 51 ± 12 y, height 1.73 ± 0.12 m, weight 83 ±18 kg) participated in this study. The cause of amputation was trauma or congenital limb deficiency for 11 (69%) and 5 (31%) participants, respectively. A total of 12 (75%) participants were prosthetic users while 4(25%) were wheelchair bound prior the surgery. The HRQOL were obtained from Questionnaire for Persons with Transfemoral Amputation (Q-TFA) using the four main scales (i.e., Prosthetic use, Mobility, Problem, Global) one year before and between 6.5 and 24 months after the Stage 1 of the surgeries for the baseline and follow-up, respectively. Results The lapse of time before and after Stage 1 was -6.19±3.54 and 10.83±3.58 months respectively. The raw score and percentage of improvement are presented in Figures 1 and 2, respectively. Discussion & Conclusion The average results demonstrated an improvement in each domain, particularly in the reduction of problems and an increase in global state. Furthermore, 56%, 75%, 94% and 69% of the participants reported an improvement in Prosthetic use, Mobility, Problem, Global scales, respectively. These results were comparable to previous studies relying of screwed fixation confirming that press-fit implantation is a viable alternative for bone-anchored prostheses.[1, 7, 8]

Transcutaneous bone-anchoring prosthesis with knee replacement: A novel treatment for amputees

Background Over the last two decades, Transcutaneous Bone-Anchored Prosthesis (TCBAP) has proven to be an effective alternative for prosthetic attachment for amputees, particularly for individuals unable to wear a socket. [1-17] However, the load transmitted through a typical TCBAP to the residual tibia and knee joint can be unbearable for transtibial amputees with knee arthritis. Aim A. To describe the surgical procedure combining TKR with TCBAP for the first time; and B. To present preliminary data on potential risks and benefits with assessment of clinical and functional outcomes at follow up Method We used a TCBAP connected to the tibial base plate of a Total Knee Replacement (TKR) prosthesis enabling the tibial residuum and the knee joint to act as weight sharing structures by transferring the load directly to the femur. We performed a standard hinged TKR connected to a custom made TCBAP at the first stage followed by creating a skin implant interface as a second stage. We retrospectively reviewed four cases of trans-tibial amputations presenting with knee joint arthritis. Patients were assessed clinically and functionally including standard measures of health-related quality of life, amputee mobility predictor tool, ambulation tests and actual activity level. Progress was monitored for 6-24 months. Results Clinical outcomes including adverse events show no major complications but one case of superficial infection. Functional outcomes improved for all participants as early as 6 months follow up. Discussion & Conclusion TKR and TCBAP were combined for the first time in this proof-of-concept case series. The preliminary outcomes indicated that this procedure is potentially a safe and effective alternative for this patient group despite the theoretical increase in risk of ascending infection through the skin-implant interface to the external environment. We suggest larger comparative series to further validate these results.

Transcutaneous bone-anchoring prosthesis with hip replacement: A novel treatment for amputees

Background Over the last two decades, Transcutaneous Bone-Anchored Prosthesis (TCBAP) has proven to be an effective alternative for prosthetic attachment for above knee amputees, particularly for individuals suffering from socket interface related complications. [1-17] Amputees with a very short femoral residuum (<15 cm) are at a considerable higher risk for these complications as well as high risk of implant failure, if they underwent a typical TCBAP due to the relatively small bony-implant contact leading to a need of a novel technique. Aim A. To describe the surgical procedure combining THR with TCBAP for the first time; and B. To present preliminary data on potential risks and benefits with assessment of clinical and functional outcomes at follow up Method We used a TCBAP connected to the stem of a Total Hip Replacement (THR) prosthesis enabling the femoral residuum and the hip joint to act as weight sharing structures by transferring the load directly to the pelvis. We performed a tri-polar THR connected to a custom made TCBAP at the first stage followed by creating a skin implant interface as a second stage. We retrospectively reviewed three cases of transfemoral amputations presenting with extremely short femoral residuum. Patients were assessed clinically and functionally including standard measures of health-related quality of life, amputee mobility predictor tool, ambulation tests and actual activity level. Progress was monitored for 6-24 months. Results Clinical outcomes including adverse events show no major complications. Functional outcomes improved for all participants as early as 6 months follow up. All cases were wheelchair bound preoperatively (K0 – AMPRO) improved to walking with One stick (K3 – AMPRO) at 3 months follow up. Discussion & Conclusion THR and TCBAP were combined for the first time in this proof-of-concept case series. The preliminary outcomes indicated that this procedure is potentially a safe and effective alternative despite the theoretical increase in risk of ascending infection through the skin-implant interface to the external environment for this patient group. We suggest larger comparative series to further validate these results.

Bone-anchored prosthesis: Current developments worldwide and challenges

Background Individuals with limb amputation fitted with conventional socket-suspended prostheses often experience socket related discomfort leading to a significant decrease in quality of life. Most of these concerns can be overcome by surgical techniques enabling bone-anchored prostheses. In this case, the prosthesis is attached directly to the residual skeleton through a percutaneous implant (e.g., screw type fixation, press-fit implant).[46, 48, 51, 52, 77, 78] The aim of this study is to present the current advances in these surgical techniques worldwide with a strong focus on the current challenges. Methods The current advances will be extracted from a systematic literature review including approximately 40 articles. The outcomes measured will include the estimation of the population worldwide as well as the complications (e.g., infection, loosening, fractures, and breakage) and the benefits (e.g., functional outcomes, health-related quality of life).[5-19, 51-53, 55, 57, 58, 62, 73, 79] Results The population of individuals fitted with a bone-anchored prosthesis is approximately 550 worldwide. Publications focusing on infection are sparse. However, the rate of superficial infection is estimated at 20%. Deep infection occurs rarely. Loosening and peri-prosthetic fractures are fairly uncommon. Breakage of implant parts occurs regularly mainly due to fall. All studies reported a significant improvement in functional level and overall quality of life. Conclusions Several commercial implants are in developments in Europe and US. The number of procedures is consistently growing worldwide. This technique might be primary way to fit a prosthesis to young and active amputees by 2025.

Bone-anchored prosthesis: Current developments worldwide and challenges

Background Individuals with limb amputation fitted with conventional socket-suspended prostheses often experience socket related discomfort leading to a significant decrease in quality of life. Most of these concerns can be overcome by surgical techniques enabling bone-anchored prostheses. In this case, the prosthesis is attached directly to the residual skeleton through a percutaneous implant (e.g., screw type fixation, press-fit implant).[46, 48, 51, 52, 77, 78] The aim of this study is to present the current advances in these surgical techniques worldwide with a strong focus on the current challenges. Methods The current advances will be extracted from a systematic literature review including approximately 40 articles. The outcomes measured will include the estimation of the population worldwide as well as the complications (e.g., infection, loosening, fractures, and breakage) and the benefits (e.g., functional outcomes, health-related quality of life).[5-19, 51-53, 55, 57, 58, 62, 73, 79] Results The population of individuals fitted with a bone-anchored prosthesis is approximately 550 worldwide. Publications focusing on infection are sparse. However, the rate of superficial infection is estimated at 20%. Deep infection occurs rarely. Loosening and peri-prosthetic fractures are fairly uncommon. Breakage of implant parts occurs regularly mainly due to fall. All studies reported a significant improvement in functional level and overall quality of life. Conclusions Several commercial implants are in developments in Europe and US. The number of procedures is consistently growing worldwide. This technique might be primary way to fit a prosthesis to young and active amputees by 2025.

Evolution in design of integral leg prosthesis leads to improved outcomes

Developments of surgical attachments for bone-anchored prostheses are slowly but surely winning over the initial disbelief in the orthopedic community. Clearly, this option is becoming accessible to a wide range of individuals with limb loss. Seminal studies have demonstrated that the pioneering procedure relying on screw-type fixation engenders major clinical benefits and acceptable safety. The surgical procedure for press-fit implants, such as the Integral-Leg-Prosthesis (ILP) has been described Dr Aschoff and his team. Some clinical benefits of press-fit implants have been also established. Here, his team is once again taking a leading role by sharing the progression over 15 years of the rate of deep infections for 69 individuals with transfemoral amputation fitted with three successive refined versions of the ILP. By definition, a double-blind randomized clinical trial to test the effect of different fixation’s design is difficult. Alternatively, Juhnke and colleagues are reporting the outcomes of action-research study for a cohort of participants. The first and foremost important outcome of this study is the confirmation that the current design of the IPL and rehabilitation program are altogether leading to an acceptable rate of deep infection and other adverse events (e.g., structural failure of implant, periprosthetic factures). This study is also providing a strong insight onto the effect of major phases in redesign of an implant on the risk of infection. This is an important reminder that the development of a successful osseointegrated implant is unlikely to be immediate but the results of a learning curve made of empirical and sequential changes led by a reflective clinical practice. Clearly, this study provided better understanding of the safety of the ILP surgical and rehabilitation procedure while establishing standards and benchmark data for future studies focusing on design and infection of press-fit implants. Complementary observations of relationship between infection and cofounders such as loading of the prosthesis and prosthetic components used would be beneficial.Further definitive evidences of the clinical benefits with the latest design would be valuable, although an increase in health related quality of life and functional outcomes are likely to be confirmed. Altogether, the authors are providing compelling evidence that bone-anchored attachments particularly those relying on press-fit implants are an established alternative to socket prostheses.

Osseointegrated total knee replacement connected to a lower limb prosthesis: 4 cases

Background and purpose — Osseointegrated implants are an alternative for prosthetic attachment in individuals with amputation who are unable to wear a socket. However, the load transmitted through the osseointegrated fixation to the residual tibia and knee joint can be unbearable for those with transtibial amputation and knee arthritis. We report on the feasibility of combining total knee replacement (TKR) with an osseointegrated implant for prosthetic attachment. Patients and methods — We retrospectively reviewed all 4 cases (aged 38–77 years) of transtibial amputations managed with osseointegration and TKR in 2012–2014. The below-the-knee prosthesis was connected to the tibial base plate of a TKR, enabling the tibial residuum and knee joint to act as weight-sharing structures. A 2-stage procedure involved connecting a standard hinged TKR to custom-made implants and creation of a skin-implant interface. Clinical outcomes were assessed at baseline and after 1–3 years of follow-up using standard measures of health-related quality of life, ambulation, and activity level including the questionnaire for transfemoral amputees (Q-TFA) and the 6-minute walk test. Results — There were no major complications, and there was 1 case of superficial infection. All patients showed improved clinical outcomes, with a Q-TFA improvement range of 29–52 and a 6-minute walk test improvement range of 37–84 meters. Interpretation — It is possible to combine TKR with osseointegrated implants.

Can the direct measurement of the load applied on the residuum of individuals with transfemoral amputation fitted with bone-anchored prosthesis help to improve the rehabilitation program?

To strive to improve the rehabilitation program of individuals with transfemoral amputation fitted with bone-anchored prosthesis based on data from direct measurements of the load applied on the residuum we first of all need to understand the load applied on the fixation. Therefore the load applied on the residuum was first directly measured during standardized activities of daily living such as straight line level walking, ascending and descending stairs and a ramp and walking around a circle. From measuring the load in standardized activities of daily living the load was also measured during different phases of the rehabilitation program such as during walking with walking aids and during load bearing exercises.[1-15] The rehabilitation program for individuals with a transfemoral amputation fitted with an OPRA implant relies on a combination of dynamic and static load bearing exercises.[16-20] This presentation will focus on the study of a set of experimental static load bearing exercises. [1] A group of eleven individuals with unilateral transfemoral amputation fitted with an OPRA implant participated in this study. The load on the implant during the static load bearing exercises was measured using a portable system including a commercial transducer embedded in a short pylon, a laptop and a customized software package. This apparatus was previously shown effective in a proof-of-concept study published by Prof. Frossard. [1-9] The analysis of the static load bearing exercises included an analysis of the reliability as well as the loading compliance. The analysis of the loading reliability showed a high reliability between the loading sessions indicating a correct repetition of the LBE by the participants. [1, 5] The analysis of the loading compliance showed a significant lack of axial compliance leading to a systematic underloading of the long axis of the implant during the proposed experimental static LBE.

Direct measurement of inner prosthesis loading during activities of daily living: Proposal for classification of functional outcome

Background The purpose of this presentation is to outline the relevance of the categorization of the load regime data to assess the functional output and usage of the prosthesis of lower limb amputees. The objectives are • To highlight the need for categorisation of activities of daily living • To present a categorization of load regime applied on residuum, • To present some descriptors of the four types of activity that could be detected, • To provide an example the results for a case. Methods The load applied on the osseointegrated fixation of one transfemoral amputee was recorded using a portable kinetic system for 5 hours. The load applied on the residuum was divided in four types of activities corresponding to inactivity, stationary loading, localized locomotion and directional locomotion as detailed in previously publications. Results The periods of directional locomotion, localized locomotion, and stationary loading occurred 44%, 34%, and 22% of recording time and each accounted for 51%, 38%, and 12% of the duration of the periods of activity, respectively. The absolute maximum force during directional locomotion, localized locomotion, and stationary loading was 19%, 15%, and 8% of the body weight on the anteroposterior axis, 20%, 19%, and 12% on the mediolateral axis, and 121%, 106%, and 99% on the long axis. A total of 2,783 gait cycles were recorded. Discussion Approximately 10% more gait cycles and 50% more of the total impulse than conventional analyses were identified. The proposed categorization and apparatus have the potential to complement conventional instruments, particularly for difficult cases.