Automated fit quantification of tibial nail designs during the insertion using computer three-dimensional modelling

Intramedullary nailing is the standard fixation method for displaced diaphyseal fractures of the tibia. An optimal nail design should both facilitate insertion and anatomically fit the bone geometry at its final position in order to reduce the risk of stress fractures and malalignments. Due to the nonexistence of suitable commercial software, we developed a software tool for the automated fit assessment of nail designs. Furthermore, we demonstrated that an optimised nail, which fits better at the final position, is also easier to insert. Three-dimensional models of two nail designs and 20 tibiae were used. The fitting was quantified in terms of surface area, maximum distance, sum of surface areas and sum of maximum distances by which the nail was protruding into the cortex. The software was programmed to insert the nail into the bone model and to quantify the fit at defined increment levels. On average, the misfit during the insertion in terms of the four fitting parameters was smaller for the Expert Tibial Nail Proximal bend (476.3 mm2, 1.5 mm, 2029.8 mm2, 6.5 mm) than the Expert Tibial Nail (736.7 mm2, 2.2 mm, 2491.4 mm2, 8.0 mm). The differences were statistically significant (p ≤ 0.05). The software could be used by nail implant manufacturers for the purpose of implant design validation.

Is there a bone-nail specific entry point? automated fit quantification of tibial nail designs during the insertion for six different nail entry points

Intramedullary nailing is the standard fixation method for displaced diaphyseal fractures of tibia. Selection of the correct nail insertion point is important for axial alignment of bone fragments and to avoid iatrogenic fractures. However, the standard entry point (SEP) may not always optimise the bone-nail fit due to geometric variations of bones. This study aimed to investigate the optimal entry for a given bone-nail pair using the fit quantification software tool previously developed by the authors. The misfit was quantified for 20 bones with two nail designs (ETN and ETN-Proximal Bend) related to the SEP and 5 entry points which were 5 mm and 10 mm away from the SEP. The SEP was the optimal entry point for 50% of the bones used. For the remaining bones, the optimal entry point was located 5 mm away from the SEP, which improved the overall fit by 40% on average. However, entry points 10 mm away from the SEP doubled the misfit. The optimised bone-nail fit can be achieved through the SEP and within the range of a 5 mm radius, except posteriorly. The study results suggest that the optimal entry point should be selected by considering the fit during insertion and not only at the final position.

Cost effectiveness of osseointegration

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. [16-25] In principle, bone-anchored prostheses should eliminate lifetime expenses associated with sockets and, consequently, potentially alleviate the financial burden of amputation for governmental organizations. Sadly, 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”.[26] 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 purposes of the presentation will be: 1. To outline methodological avenues to assess the cost-effectiveness of bone-anchored prostheses compared to conventional sockets prostheses, 2. To highlight the potential obstacles and limitations in cost-effectiveness analyses of bone-anchored prostheses, 3. To present preliminary results of a cost-comparison analysis focusing on the comparison of the costs expressed in dollars over QALS funding cycles for both methods of attachment.

Osseointegration internationally: Australia is playing a key role?

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. [16-25] 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.

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

The benefits and safety transcutaneous bone anchored prosthesis relying on a screw fixation are well reported. However, most of the studies on press-fit implants and joint replacement technology have focused on surgical techniques. One European centre using this technique has reported on health-related quality of life (HRQOL) for a group of individuals with transfemoral amputation (TFA). Data from other centres are needed to assess the effectiveness of the technique in different settings. The aim of this study is to report 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.

Description of body posture during Static load bearing exercises for individuals with transfemoral amputation fitted with bone-anchored prosthesis

The rehabilitation programs of bone-anchorage prostheses relying either on the OPRA (Integrum, Sweden) or the ILP (Orthodynamics, Germany) fixation involve some forms of static load bearing exercises (LBE). So far, most of biomechanical studies of these static LBEs focused on the direct measurements of the actual forces and moments applied on the OPRA fixation of individuals with transfemoral amputation (TFA). To date, the proof-of-concept of an apparatus to conduct these kinetic measurements has been presented, along with some preliminary data. The understanding of the kinetic data is essential to improve rehabilitation programs as well as the design of upcoming loading frames. However, kinetic information alone is difficult to interpret without concomitant kinematic data. The purpose of this preliminary study was to introduce a qualitative analysis describing the different body postures during LBE for a group of TFAs.

Spatio-temporal characteristics of locomotion of transfemoral amputees fitted with bone-anchored prosthesis

The conventional method of attachment of prosthesis involves on a socket. A new method relying on osseointegrated fixation is emerging. It has significant prosthetic benefits. Only a few studies demonstrated the biomechanical benefits. The specific objective of this study was to present the key temporal and spatial gait characteristics for unilateral amputation. The ultimate aim of this study was to characterise the functional outcome of the individual with transfemoral lower limb amputation fitted with osseointegrated fixation, which can be assess through temporal and spatial gait characteristics.

Static load bearing exercises during rehabilitation of individuals with transfemoral amputation fitted with osseointegrated implant: Kinetic analysis

The desire to solve problems caused by socket prostheses in transfemoral amputees and the acquired success of osseointegration in the dental application has led to the introduction of osseointegration in the orthopedic surgery. Since its first introduction in 1990 in Gothenburg Sweden the osseointegrated (OI) orthopedic fixation has proven several benefits[1]. The surgery consists of two surgical procedures followed by a lengthy rehabilitation program. The rehabilitation program after an OI implant includes a specific training period with a short training prosthesis. Since mechanical loading is considered to be one of the key factors that influence bone mass and the osseointegration of bone-anchored implants, the rehabilitation program will also need to include some form of load bearing exercises (LBE). To date there are two frequently used commercially available human implants. We can find proof in the literature that load bearing exercises are performed by patients with both types of OI implants. We refer to two articles, a first one written by Dr. Aschoff and all and published in 2010 in the Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery.[2] The second one presented by Hagberg et al in 2009 gives a very thorough description of the rehabilitation program of TFA fitted with an OPRA implant. The progression of the load however is determined individually according to the residual skeleton’s quality, pain level and body weight of the participant.[1] Patients are using a classical bathroom weighing scale to control the load on the implant during the course of their rehabilitation. The bathroom scale is an affordable and easy-to-use device but it has some important shortcomings. The scale provides instantaneous feedback to the patient only on the magnitude of the vertical component of the applied force. The forces and moments applied along and around the three axes of the implant are unknown. Although there are different ways to assess the load on the implant for instance through inverse dynamics in a motion analysis laboratory [3-6] this assessment is challenging. A recent proof- of-concept study by Frossard et al (2009) showed that the shortcomings of the weighing scale can be overcome by a portable kinetic system based on a commercial transducer[7].

Walking ability of individuals with transfemoral amputation fitted with osseointegrated implant

The prosthetic benefits of osseointegrated fixation for individuals with limb loss, particularly those with transfemoral amputation (TFA), have been clearly demonstrated in the literature. However, very little information is currently available to established how this prosthetic benefits are translated into functional outcomes and, more precisely, walking abilities [1-3]. The ultimate aim of this presentation was to explore how walking abilities of a TFA fitted with an OPRA fixation could be assess through typical temporal and spatial gait characteristics[2].

Direct measurement as a tool for assessing the accuracy of inverse dynamics

The understanding of the loads generated within the prosthetic leg can aid engineers in the design of components and clinicians in the process of rehabilitation. Traditional methods to assess these loads have relied on inverse dynamics. This indirect method estimates the applied load using video recordings and force-plates located at a distance from the region of interest, such as the base of the residuum. The well-known limitations of this method are related to the accuracy of this recursive model and the experimental conditions required (Frossard et al., 2003). Recent developments in sensors (Frossard et al., 2003) and prosthetic fixation (Brånemark et al., 2000) permit the direct measurement of the loads applied on the residuum of transfemoral amputees. In principle, direct measurement should be an appropriate tool for assessing the accuracy of inverse dynamics. The purpose of this paper is to determine the validity of this assumption. The comparative variable used in this study is the velocity of the relative body center of mass (VCOM(t)). The relativity is used to align the static (w.r.t. position) force plate measurement with the dynamic load cell measurement.

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.

Safety of OPRA procedure for individuals with upper limb amputation

Surgical implantations of osseointegrated fixations for bone-anchored prosthesis are developing at an unprecedented pace worldwide while initial skepticism in the orthopedic community is slowly fading away. Clearly, this option is becoming accessible to a wide range of individuals with limb loss. [1-18] The team led by Dr Rickard Branemark has previously published a number of landmark articles focusing on the benefits and safety of the OPRA fixation mainly for individual with lower limb loss, particularly those with transfemoral amputation. [1-3, 19-32] However, similar information is lacking for those with upper limb amputation. This team is once again taking a leading role by sharing a retrospective study focusing on the implant survival, adverse events, implant stability, and bone remodelling for 18 individuals with transhumeral amputation over a 5-year post-operative period. Therefore, a comprehensive analysis of the safety of the procedure is accessible for the first time. In essence, the results showed an implant survival rate of 83% and 80% at 2 and 5 year follow ups, respectively. The most frequent adverse events were superficial skin infections that occurred for 28% (5) participants while the least frequent was deep bone infection that happened only once. More importantly, 38% of complications due to infections were effectively managed with nonoperative treatments (e.g., revision of skin penetration site, local cleaning, antibiotics, restriction of soft tissue mobility). Implant stability and bone remodelling were satisfactory. Clearly, this study provided better understanding of the safety of the OPRA surgical and rehabilitation procedure for individuals with upper limb amputation while establishing standards and benchmark data for future studies. However, strong evidences of the benefits are yet to be demonstrated. However, increase in health related quality of life and functional outcomes (e.g., range of movement) are likely. Altogether, the team of authors are providing further evidence that bone-anchored attachment is definitely a promising alternative to socket prostheses.

Effects of anticoagulants on outcome of femoral neck fracture surgery

PURPOSE To review records of 330 patients who underwent surgery for femoral neck fractures with or without preoperative anticoagulation therapy. METHODS Medical records of 235 women and 95 men aged 48 to 103 years (mean, 81.6; standard deviation [SD], 13.1) who underwent surgery for femoral neck fractures with or without preoperative anticoagulation therapy were reviewed. 30 patients were on warfarin, 105 on aspirin, 28 on clopidogrel, and 167 were controls. The latter 3 groups were combined as the non-warfarin group and compared with the warfarin group. Hospital mortality, time from admission to surgery, length of hospital stay, return to theatre, and postoperative complications (wound infection, deep vein thrombosis, and pulmonary embolism) were assessed. RESULTS The warfarin and control groups were significantly younger than the clopidogrel and aspirin groups (80.8 vs. 80.0 vs. 84.2 vs. 83.7 years, respectively, p<0.05). 81% of the patients underwent surgery within 48 hours of admission. The overall mean time from admission to surgery was 1.8 days; it was longer in the warfarin than the aspirin, clopidogrel, and control groups (3.3 vs. 1.8 vs. 1.6 vs. 1.6 days, respectively, p<0.001). The mean length of hospital stay was 17.5 (SD, 9.6; range, 3-54) days. The overall hospital mortality was 3.9%; it was 6.7% in the warfarin group, 3.8% in the aspirin group, 3.6% in the clopidogrel group, and 3.6% in the control group (p=0.80). Four patients returned to theatre for surgery: one in the warfarin group for washout of a haematoma, 2 in the aspirin group for repositioning of a mal-fixation and for debridement of wound infection, and one in the control group for debridement of wound infection. The warfarin group did not differ significantly from non-warfarin group in terms of postoperative complication rate (6.7% vs. 2.7%, p=0.228) and the rate of return to theatre (3.3% vs. 1%, p=0.318). CONCLUSION It is safe to continue aspirin and clopidogrel prior to surgical treatment for femoral neck fracture. The risk of delaying surgery outweighs the peri-operative bleeding risk.

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).