Abstract

Modern computerized planning tools for periacetabular osteotomy (PAO) use either morphology-based or biomechanics-based methods. The latter relies on estimation of peak contact pressures and contact areas using either patient specific or constant thickness cartilage models. We performed a finite element analysis investigating the optimal reorientation of the acetabulum in PAO surgery based on simulated joint contact pressures and contact areas using patient specific cartilage model. Furthermore we investigated the influences of using patient specific cartilage model or constant thickness cartilage model on the biomechanical simulation results. Ten specimens with hip dysplasia were used in this study. Image data were available from CT arthrography studies. Bone models were reconstructed. Mesh models for the patient specific cartilage were defined and subsequently loaded under previously reported boundary and loading conditions. Peak contact pressures and contact areas were estimated in the original position. Afterwards we used a validated preoperative planning software to change the acetabular inclination by an increment of 5° and measured the lateral center edge angle (LCE) at each reorientation position. The position with the largest contact area and the lowest peak contact pressure was defined as the optimal position. In order to investigate the influence of using patient specific cartilage model or constant thickness cartilage model on the biomechanical simulation results, the same procedure was repeated with the same bone models but with a cartilage mesh of constant thickness. Comparison of the peak contact pressures and the contact areas between these two different cartilage models showed that good correlation between these two cartilage models for peak contact pressures (r = 0.634 ∈ [0.6, 0.8], p < 0.001) and contact areas (r = 0.872 > 0.8, p < 0.001). For both cartilage models, the largest contact areas and the lowest peak pressures were found at the same position. Our study is the first study comparing peak contact pressures and contact areas between patient specific and constant thickness cartilage models during PAO planning. Good correlation for these two models was detected. Computer assisted planning with FE modeling using constant thickness cartilage models might be a promising PAO planning tool when a conventional CT is available.

Highlights

  • Periacetabular osteotomy (PAO) is an established surgical intervention for treatment of hip dysplasia and acetabular retroversion [1, 2]

  • We investigated the following research questions: 1. What is the optimal position of the acetabulum based on simulated joint contact pressures using patient specific cartilage models in a FE analysis?

  • While the initial contact area in the dysplastic hip was primarily located in an eccentric superolateral region of the acetabulum, an increase in lateral center edge (LCE) angle led to an enlarged and more homogeneously distributed contact area (Fig 3)

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Periacetabular osteotomy (PAO) is an established surgical intervention for treatment of hip dysplasia and acetabular retroversion [1, 2]. Different approaches have been presented using for example Discrete Element Analysis (DEA) [12], or the more sophisticated Finite Element Analysis (FEA) [13, 14] In literature, both constant thickness cartilage models [14] and patient specific cartilage models [15] have been suggested. We have developed a morphology-based 3D planning system for PAO [16] This system allows for quantification of the hip joint morphology in three dimensions, using geometric parameters such as inclination and anteversion angle, the lateral center edge (LCE) angle and femoral head coverage. It allows for virtual reorientation of the acetabulum according to these parameters. We investigated the following research questions: 1. What is the optimal position of the acetabulum based on simulated joint contact pressures using patient specific cartilage models in a FE analysis?

Objectives
Methods
Results
Conclusion
Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call