Initial Instability in Total Ankle Replacement: A Cadaveric Biomechanical Investigation of the STAR and Agility Prostheses
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Design improvements have increased the success of total ankle replacement, providing patients with end-stage ankle arthritis a viable alternative to arthrodesis. However, revision rates are higher than those for hip and knee arthroplasty, with the most prevalent cause of failure being aseptic loosening. The objective of this study was to quantify and compare the relative bone-implant motion patterns in two well-known total ankle replacement designs. METHODS: A custom-designed mechanical simulator applied compressive loads (up to 300 N) and bending moments (3 Nm) to six pairs of human cadaveric ankles implanted with total ankle replacements, inducing a natural range of motion about three orthogonal axes: plantar flexion-dorsiflexion, inversion-eversion, and internal-external rotation. The implants analyzed were the Agility and the STAR (Scandinavian Total Ankle Replacement). The relative bone-implant motions for each implant component were measured with use of an optical motion capture system. RESULTS: The Agility typically exhibited greater relative motion than the STAR, with significant differences for the tibial component in inversion-eversion (p = 0.037) and for the talar component in internal-external rotation (p = 0.039). The magnitudes of the relative motions were affected by the loading direction and by compression. The motion magnitudes were quite large, with values exceeding 1000 μm for the Agility talar component in plantar flexion-dorsiflexion and in inversion-eversion. CONCLUSIONS: The greater magnitudes of relative motion in the Agility suggest that primary instability of the implant may contribute to its higher clinically observed aseptic loosening rate. Future total ankle replacement designs will require better fixation to improve outcomes. The results underscore the need to conduct preclinical biomechanical assessments of relative motion patterns in ankle replacements. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Stable initial implant fixation will likely improve clinical outcomes of total ankle replacement.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".