A Systematic Review of Unsystematic Total Ankle Replacement Wear Evaluations

Comparison of joint load, motions and contact stress and bone-implant interface micromotion of three implant designs for total ankle arthroplasty

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Loosening and wear are still the main problems for the failure of total ankle arthroplasty, which are closely related to the micromotion at the bone-implant interface and the contact stress and joint motions at the articular surfaces. Implant design is a key factor to influence the ankle force, motions, contact stress, and bone-implant interface micromotion. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the differences in these parameters of INBONE II, INFINITY, and a new anatomic ankle implant under the physiological walking gait of three patients.

METHODS

This was achieved by using an in-silico simulation framework combining patient-specific musculoskeletal multibody dynamics and finite element analysis. Each implant was implanted into the musculoskeletal multibody dynamics model, respectively, which was driven by the gait data to calculate ankle forces and motions. These were then used as the boundary conditions for the finite element model, and the contact stress and the bone-implant interface micromotions were calculated.

RESULTS

The total ankle contact forces were not significantly affected by articular surface geometries of ankle implants. The range of motion of the ankle joint implanted with INFINITY was a little larger than that with INBONE II. The anatomic ankle implant design produced a greater range of motion than INBONE II, especially the internal-external rotation. The fixation design of INFINITY achieved lower bone-implant interface micromotion compared with INBONE II. The anatomic ankle implant design produced smaller contact stress with no evident edge contact and a smaller tibia-implant interface micromotion. In addition, significant differences in the magnitudes and tendencies of total ankle contact forces and motions among different patients were found.

CONCLUSIONS

The articular surface geometry of ankle implants not only affected the ankle motions and contact stress distribution but also affected the bone-implant interface micromotions. The anatomic ankle implant had good performance in recovering ankle joint motion, equalizing contact stress, and reducing bone-implant interface micromotion. INFINITY's fixation design could achieve smaller bone-implant interface micromotion than INBONE II.

A review of advances in tribology in 2020–2021

Around 1,000 peer-reviewed papers were selected from 3,450 articles published during 2020–2021, and reviewed as the representative advances in tribology research worldwide. The survey highlights the development in lubrication, wear and surface engineering, biotribology, high temperature tribology, and computational tribology, providing a show window of the achievements of recent fundamental and application researches in the field of tribology.

Is load control necessary to produce physiological AP displacement and axial rotation in wear testing of TAR?

The International Standard Organization, ISO 22622, specifies two options for joint wear simulator evaluation of total ankle replacements (TARs): load-controlled and displacement-controlled. In the present study, the load-controlled testing parameters were applied to cadaveric specimens to quantify and compare the observed sagittal translations and axial rotations to those specified under the displacement-controlled option. Twelve cadaveric specimens were stripped of extraneous tissues, keeping surrounding ankle ligaments. A halo was used to produce plantarflexion and dorsiflexion of the talus through two screws, while a baseplate resisted axial loads. The axial force and torque were applied to the tibia and fibula under force and torque feedback control. An anterior-posterior force was applied to the tibia. Plantarflexion-dorsiflexion were applied using rotation control. To protect the cadaveric specimens, loads were applied at 50% of the specified load profile while plantarflexion-dorsiflexion rotation was applied as specified. There was variation among specimens in magnitudes of anterior-posterior displacement with peaks ranging from 3.3 mm posteriorly to 3.0 mm anteriorly. Likewise, there was variation among specimens in magnitude of axial rotation, with peaks ranging from 11° external rotation to 4.5° internal rotation. However, the mean magnitudes of AP displacement and axial rotation did not exceed those specified by ISO 22622.