cement removal
Recently Published Documents


TOTAL DOCUMENTS

60
(FIVE YEARS 3)

H-INDEX

9
(FIVE YEARS 0)

2022 ◽  
Vol 25 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Luís Felipe GUILARDI ◽  
Kiara Serafini DAPIEVE ◽  
João Carlos GIORDANI ◽  
Alexandre Henrique SUSIN ◽  
Luiz Felipe VALANDRO ◽  
...  

2021 ◽  
Vol 9 ◽  
pp. 112-117
Author(s):  
Miguel Tovar-Bazaga ◽  
David Sáez-Martínez ◽  
Álvaro Auñón ◽  
Felipe López-Oliva ◽  
Belén Pardos-Mayo ◽  
...  

2021 ◽  
Vol 104 ◽  
pp. 102745
Author(s):  
Carolina Menezes Maciel ◽  
Tatiane Cristina Vieira Souto ◽  
Adriano Augusto Melo de Mendonça ◽  
Wilton Mitsunari Takeshita ◽  
Sandro Griza ◽  
...  

2020 ◽  
Vol 9 (4) ◽  
pp. 1098 ◽  
Author(s):  
Álvaro Zubizarreta-Macho ◽  
Martina Triduo ◽  
Jorge Alonso Pérez-Barquero ◽  
Clara Guinot Barona ◽  
Alberto Albaladejo Martínez

The aim of this study was to construct a novel, repeatable, reproducible, and accurate measurement protocol for the area and volume of the remaining cement after removal of fixed multibracket appliances, the area and volume of remaining cement after cement removal, the area and volume of enamel removed after cement removal, and the volume of cement used to adhere fixed multibracket appliances. A total of 30 brackets were cemented and removed with over 30 extracted teeth embedded into three experimental models of epoxy resin. The models were scanned before and after bracket placement, bracket debonding, and polishing the remaining cement. The brackets were submitted to micro-computed tomography. The standard tessellation language digital files were aligned, segmented, and re-aligned using geomorphometric software. The digital measurement technique accuracy, repeatability, and reproducibility were analyzed using Gage R&R statistical analysis. The variability attributable to the area and volume measurement techniques of the total variability of the samples was 0.70% and 0.11% for repeatability, respectively, and 0.79% and 0.01% for reproducibility, respectively. The re-alignment procedure is a repeatable, reproducible, and accurate technique that can be used to measure the area and volume of the remaining cement after removal of fixed multibracket appliances, the area and volume of remaining cement after cement removal, the area and volume of enamel removed after cement removal, and the volume of cement used to adhere the fixed multibracket appliance.


2019 ◽  
Vol 12 (11) ◽  
pp. e227830
Author(s):  
Benedict Lotz ◽  
Antony Palmer ◽  
Sunny D Deo

We report the case of a 77-year-old woman who presented with a 10-day history of increasing swelling and erythema of her right calf and popliteal areas 12 years after bilateral total knee replacements. Deep venous thrombosis (DVT), cellulitis or possible deep sepsis as a result of the knee replacement were the initial differential diagnoses. Due to clinical deterioration, exploration and radical debridement were performed and a 1.5 L collection of pus was identified through a small posteromedial proximal tibial bone defect adjacent to the tibial component, extending between gastrocnemius, soleus and into the distal calf. The procedure was extended to a first stage revision (complete implant and cement removal). Although leg swelling is common in joint infections secondary to knee swelling as a result of the inflammation, synovitis and/or knee effusion response, this case highlights the need to consider additional pathology such as deep abscess formation or DVT in these types of presentations.


2019 ◽  
Vol 33 (19) ◽  
pp. 2112-2127 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ana Beatriz do Nascimento Januário ◽  
Dayanne Monielle Duarte Moura ◽  
Arthur Magno Medeiros de Araújo ◽  
Amanda Maria de Oliveira Dal Piva ◽  
Mutlu Özcan ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  

2019 ◽  
Vol 8 (6) ◽  
pp. 246-252 ◽  
Author(s):  
A. Liddle ◽  
M. Webb ◽  
N. Clement ◽  
S. Green ◽  
J. Liddle ◽  
...  

ObjectivesPrevious studies have evidenced cement-in-cement techniques as reliable in revision arthroplasty. Commonly, the original cement mantle is reshaped, aiding accurate placement of the new stem. Ultrasonic devices selectively remove cement, preserve host bone, and have lower cortical perforation rates than other techniques. As far as the authors are aware, the impact of ultrasonic devices on final cement-in-cement bonds has not been investigated. This study assessed the impact of cement removal using the Orthosonics System for Cemented Arthroplasty Revision (OSCAR; Orthosonics) on final cement-in-cement bonds.MethodsA total of 24 specimens were manufactured by pouring cement (Simplex P Bone Cement; Stryker) into stainless steel moulds, with a central rod polished to Stryker Exeter V40 specifications. After cement curing, the rods were removed and eight specimens were allocated to each of three internal surface preparation groups: 1) burr; 2) OSCAR; and 3) no treatment. Internal holes were recemented, and each specimen was cut into 5 mm discs. Shear testing of discs was completed by a technician blinded to the original grouping, recording ultimate shear strengths. Scanning electron microscopy (SEM) was completed, inspecting surfaces of shear-tested specimens.ResultsThe mean shear strength for OSCAR-prepared specimens (33.6 MPa) was significantly lower than for the control (46.3 MPa) and burr (45.8 MPa) groups (p < 0.001; one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) with Tukey’s post hoc analysis). There was no significant difference in shear strengths between control and burr groups (p = 0.57). Scanning electron microscopy of OSCAR specimens revealed evidence of porosity undiscovered in previous studies.ConclusionResults show that the cement removal technique impacts on final cement-in-cement bonds. This in vitro study demonstrates significantly weaker bonds when using OSCAR prior to recementation into an old cement mantle compared with cement prepared with a burr or no treatment. This infers that care must be taken in surgical decision-making regarding cement removal techniques used during cement-in-cement revision arthroplasty, suggesting that the risks and benefits of ultrasonic cement removal need consideration. Cite this article: A. Liddle, M. Webb, N. Clement, S. Green, J. Liddle, M. German, J. Holland. Ultrasonic cement removal in cement-in-cement revision total hip arthroplasty: What is the effect on the final cement-in-cement bond? Bone Joint Res 2019;8:246–252. DOI: 10.1302/2046-3758.86.BJR-2018-0313.R1.


2019 ◽  
Vol 121 (3) ◽  
pp. 504-509 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ankur Dahiya ◽  
Nadim Z. Baba ◽  
Mathew T. Kattadiyil ◽  
Charles J. Goodacre ◽  
Akshita Mann

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document