Abstracts Posters SICOT-SOF meeting Gothenburg 2010 _2_

Poster
Topic: General Orthopaedics
Abstract number: 26384
DIFFERENCES BETWEEN BONE ANCHORED AND TRADITIONAL SOCKET
PROSTHESES FOR TRANSFEMORAL AMPUTEES.
Eva HÄGGSTRöM 1 , Kerstin HAGBERG 2 , Rickard BRÅNEMARK 1 , Björn RYDEVIK 1
1 Sahlgrenska University Hospital, Gothenburg (SWEDEN), 2 Shalgrenska University
Hospital, Mölndal (SWEDEN)
Since 1990 the Sahlgrenska University Hospital in Gothenburg, Sweden has been
the centre for prosthetic rehabilitation for patients treated with upper or lower
extremity bone-anchored (osseointegrated) amputation prostheses. Today more than
100 patients with transfemoral amputation have been treated. The aim of this
presentation is to illustrate differences between bone anchored and traditional socket
prostheses for patients with transfemoral amputation. In traditional prosthetic
rehabilitation a prosthetic socket is made from a cast of the residual limb. In the
normal case a new socket has to be produced every second or third year for the rest
of the patient’s lifetime. Our treatment for a bone anchored prostheses is a two stage
surgery procedure (S1 and S2) using the method of osseointegration. A titanium
implant is used and after the surgeries an abutment will protrude through the skin out
of the residual limb. Four to six weeks after surgery S2 the patient will start to load
and strengthen the skeleton by using a short training prosthesis. The full length
prosthesis (osseointegrated prosthesis) is supplied about 3 months after S2. The OIprostheses
is easily attached to the abutment. The most obvious difference between
the two prostheses is the lack of a prosthetic socket. All problems regarding
suspension of a prosthetic socket are solved. Other advantages are free hip range of
motion and comfortable sitting. Data also indicate that patients using OI. prostheses
have improved sensation through the prosthesis (osseoperception).
280