Metal debris from bony resection in knee arthroplasty—is it an issue?

Figures & data

Figure 1. The two types of oscillating saw blades used in the study. Top: non-conventional with ridges; bottom: conventional.

Table 1. Average amount of material removed (g) from the blades

Blade	Initial weight	Weight after use	Material removed
Conventional blade – captured block
2	21.22305	21.22113	0.00192
3	21.32156	21.31968	0.00188
4	21.29550	21.29443	0.00107
5	21.34604	21.34554	0.00050
6	21.31720	21.31702	0.00018
Average			0.00111
95% CI			0.0001−0.0021
Ridged blade – captured block
7	18.26966	18.26856	0.00110
8	18.39092	18.38991	0.00101
9	18.42444	18.42235	0.00209
10	18.30451	18.30394	0.00057
11	18.18065	18.17980	0.00085
Average			0.00112
95% CI			0.0004–0.0018
Ridged blade – uncaptured block
17	18.25678	18.2560	0.00078
18	18.3944	18.3934	0.00100
19	18.61259	18.61107	0.00152
20	18.57775	18.57584	0.00191
21	18.21567	18.21515	0.00052
Average			0.000115
95% CI			0.0004–0.0018

CI = confidence interval

Figure 2. Platelet wear particles, 300× magnification.

Figure 3. Ploughed wear particles, 600× magnification.

Figure 4. Particle size distribution.

Figure 5. Spectral analysis showing the composition of the blades (a) and the blocks (b). The blocks show additional peaks for nickel and copper.

Table 2. Hardness values for saw blade and cutting block

	Rockwell C
Conventional blade	53
Ridged blade	54
Test block (ex-surgical)	40