High flexion (HF) implants were introduced to increase ROM and patient satisfaction, but design changes to the implant potentially have deleterious effects on polyethylene wear. It is unclear whether the HF implants affect wear.
We therefore examined whether the design changes between HF and posterior-stabilized (PS) tibial inserts would affect overall damage or damage on their articular surface, backside, and tibial post and whether flexion angle achieved related to damage.
HF inserts are more susceptible to post damage, possibly as a result of higher contact stresses from greater flexion. The increased backside damage was unexpected because the two groups have the same tibial component, locking mechanism, and sterilization method.
Clinical Relevance: The introduction of a highly crosslinked HF insert will require close scrutiny as a result of the potential for post damage demonstrated in this series.
Copyright remains with the authors and publisher.
High flexion (HF) implants were introduced to increase ROM and patient satisfaction, but design changes to the implant potentially have deleterious effects on polyethylene wear. It is unclear whether the HF implants affect wear.
We therefore examined whether the design changes between HF and posterior-stabilized (PS) tibial inserts would affect overall damage or damage on their articular surface, backside, and tibial post and whether flexion angle achieved related to damage.
HF inserts are more susceptible to post damage, possibly as a result of higher contact stresses from greater flexion. The increased backside damage was unexpected because the two groups have the same tibial component, locking mechanism, and sterilization method.
Clinical Relevance: The introduction of a highly crosslinked HF insert will require close scrutiny as a result of the potential for post damage demonstrated in this series.
Copyright remains with the authors and publisher.