Angled Hip Implant Insertion Feature Curved Impactor
Find Innovative SolutionsGenerate Solutions
Solution Overview
Problem
Current hip implant insertion methods using straight, in-line impactors often interfere with the greater trochanter during surgery, leading to incomplete seating of the implant and potential biomechanical issues such as subsidence and dislocation.
Innovation Solution
The 'around the corner' surgical technique, where the insertion feature is angled and the impactor is curved to navigate around the greater trochanter, allowing for rotational control and low-force removal, enabling the implant to be seated without impinging on the trochanter.
Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles
Engineering Contradiction Analysis
1Ease of operation
If a straight, in-line impactor is used with the insertion feature positioned on the lateral-superior aspect of the implant, then the implant can be inserted, but the impactor interferes with the greater trochanter preventing complete seating
Solution Approach 1:
The impactor is curved rather than straight, allowing it to navigate around the greater trochanter and avoid impingement while still delivering the implant to its final position. The curvature enables the impactor to follow a path that clears the trochanteric obstacle.
Solution Approach 2:
The insertion feature is angled relative to the longitudinal axis of the implant, creating a non-axial insertion path. This angular orientation allows the impactor to approach the implant from a different dimensional angle, avoiding collision with the greater trochanter while achieving proper seating.
2Ease of operation
If the insertion feature is positioned on the lateral-superior aspect of the implant, then accessibility of the feature is improved, but the impactor cannot be fully inserted without hitting the greater trochanter
Solution Approach 1:
The curved impactor design provides a smooth, continuous path that navigates around the greater trochanter, simplifying the navigation task compared to attempting to maneuver a straight impactor around the obstacle. The curvature inherently guides the impactor along the necessary arc.
Solution Approach 2:
The impactor features an asymmetric curved profile that is optimized for the specific anatomical constraints of the greater trochanter. The curvature and angulation are asymmetrically designed to match the unilateral nature of the surgical approach and the specific geometry of the trochanteric obstacle.
3Loss of substance
If a short implant is used to spare the greater trochanter, then bone preservation is improved, but the insertion feature position causes impingement issues
Solution Approach 1:
The curved impactor enables complete seating of the short implant without requiring extension into the greater trochanter region. By following a curved path, the impactor can deliver the implant to its final position while clearing the trochanteric area, ensuring proper seating without bone sacrifice.
Solution Approach 2:
The angled insertion feature allows the impactor to approach the implant from a non-axial direction, enabling complete seating of the short implant through a path that avoids the greater trochanter. This dimensional change in the insertion approach ensures full implant engagement without trochanteric impingement.
Data Source
AI summary
An implant includes a body configured to be implanted at least partially within a bone canal. The body has a proximal end, a longitudinal axis and a cavity located at the proximal end. The cavity is configured to mate with an insertion tool and defines a cavity axis that is not parallel to the longitudinal axis of the implant.