Introduction to Polyethylene Inserts

What is/are Polyethylene Inserts?

Polyethylene Inserts - The present study investigated the response of patients (quality of life, mobility and pain management) with titanium/hydroxyapatite-coated implants with polyethylene inserts. ^[1] 3%, wear of polyethylene inserts — 1. ^[2] However, the number and variety of polyethylene inserts and articulations have continued to evolve in an attempt to better replicate native knee kinematics or provide additional constraint. ^[3] Bearing fracture is a very rare complication associated with mobile bearing UKA and patients with thin polyethylene inserts are at risk for bearing fracture even in the absence of poly wear. ^[4] The purpose of this study was to analyze the kinematic differences between symmetrical and asymmetrical polyethylene inserts and to detect the kinematic benefit in the asymmetrical polyethylene insert. ^[5] High-density polyethylene inserts were embedded in the composites during processing via vacuum assisted resin transfer molding (RTM). ^[6] These polyethylene inserts prevent paradoxical anterior translation of the femur, without relying on a cam and post mechanism, and promote more physiologic native knee kinematics. ^[7] Polyethylene inserts received by the laboratory 6 months or less after retrieval (n = 45) were analyzed for oxidation using Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy. ^[8] Six additively manufactured polyethylene inserts were fabricated, one unworn control and five to represent known wear patterns, and individually fit within the rTSA components. ^[9] The semi- constrained design of this two-component implant and utilization of biased polyethylene inserts allowed for correction of the talus in both the sagittal (talar anterior / posterior translation) and coronal planes (talar varus / valgus). ^[10] Conclusion Our results showed that increasing conformity may not be the sole predictor of wear performance; highly crosslinked mobile-bearing polyethylene inserts can also provide improvement in wear performance. ^[11] The paper presents analysis of stress distribution in the friction node of knee joint endoprosthesis where sleds are made of various titanium alloys and CoCrMo cooperate with spherical polyethylene inserts. ^[12] Retrieved tibial polyethylene inserts were analyzed for screw hole impression and mode of wear. ^[13] CONCLUSION Clinical results were comparable between vitamin E-infused HXLPE inserts and conventional polyethylene inserts at two years after TKA, without any significant clinical failure. ^[14] Wear at the contact area between femoral metal component and the polyethylene inserts in TKR is recognized as one of the foremost causes of prosthesis failure and necessity of revision surgery. ^[15] Only Unicondylar knee Arthroplasty gives the ability to sit cross legged (most Total knees are not allowed to sit cross legged for fear of exaggerated wear and those that are have a unacceptable percentage of spin offs or dislocation of polyethylene inserts) 3. ^[16] Standard tibial polyethylene inserts were used. ^[17] OBJECTIVE This study evaluates the effects of the posterior slope of the tibia on contact stresses in polyethylene inserts and articular cartilage using finite element analysis. ^[18] METHODS Sixteen custom polyethylene inserts were contaminated with potting soil and processed in one of four protocols: 1) hydrogen peroxide, 2) chlorhexidine gluconate, 3) povidone-iodine, or 4) control. ^[19] In the current study, we performed a compression test and a finite element analysis of the mechanical forces produced in the tibial post in posterior-stabilized knee prostheses in order to develop a specification for the tibial posts found in the polyethylene inserts of PS knee prostheses. ^[20]

Tibial Polyethylene Inserts

Retrieved tibial polyethylene inserts were analyzed for screw hole impression and mode of wear. ^[1] Standard tibial polyethylene inserts were used. ^[2]