Abstract

BackgroundFemoral head collapse is the key to the progress of osteonecrosis of the femoral head (ONFH), but the causes of collapse are not completely clear. The better understanding of the progress of femoral head collapse will guide the treatment strategy for ONFH patients. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the biomechanical influence of necrosis area on the collapse of the femoral head by finite element analysis.MethodsCT and MRI data from the hip joint of a healthy volunteer were collected to establish a finite element (FE) model of a normal hip. Subsequently, five categories of osteonecrosis FE models were established by using the normal model and computer software according to China-Japan Friendship Hospital (CJFH) classification for ONFH. The CJFH system includes five types based on the size and location of necrosis lesions in the femoral head (type M, C, L1, L2, and L3) and the stage of ONFH. The collapse indices of each model were analyzed by FE method, including the displacement, peak von Mises stress and stress index of the simulated necrotic area as well as the lateral pillar contact area of the femoral head to acetabular.Results(1) The displacement increments in the simulated necrotic areas of type M, C, L1, L2, and L3 models were 3.75 μm, 8.24 μm, 8.47 μm, 18.42 μm, and 20.44 μm respectively; the peak von Mises stress decrements were 1.50 MPa, 3.74 MPa, 3.73 MPa, 4.91 MPa, and 4.92 MPa respectively; and the stress indices were 0.04, 0.08, 0.08, 0.27, and 0.27 respectively. (2) The displacement increments in the lateral pillar contact areas of five type models were significantly different (P < 0.001) and increased in sequence as follows: 1.93 ± 0.15 μm, 5.74 ± 0.92 μm, 5.84 ± 1.42 μm, 14.50 ± 3.00 μm, and 16.43 ± 3.05 μm. The peak von Mises stress decrements were also significantly different (P < 0.001) and increased in sequence as follows: 0.52 ± 0.30 MPa, 0.55 ± 0.12 MPa, 0.67 ± 0.33 MPa, 4.17 ± 0.59 MPa, and 4.19 ± 0.60 MPa. (3) The collapse indices including the displacement increments and peak von Mises stress decrements of type L2 and L3 models were markedly higher than those of type M, C, and L1 models (P < 0.001).ConclusionsThe collapse indices of the femoral heads of type L2 and L3 FE models were significantly higher than those of type M, C, and L1. Different areas of necrosis result in varied impact on the femoral head collapse.

Highlights

  • Femoral head collapse is the key to the progress of osteonecrosis of the femoral head (ONFH), but the causes of collapse are not completely clear

  • It is believed that the collapse of necrotic area of femoral head is directly related to biomechanical factors [7,8,9], which is mainly due to some reasons: the decrease of stress in necrotic area, the concentration of stress around necrotic bone, the lower elastic modulus and yield strength of bone tissue in ischemic necrotic area compared to normal tissue and the loss of normal mechanical support [6, 10]

  • The purpose of this study was to evaluate the influence of necrosis area on femoral head collapse and disease progression of Osteonecrosis of the femoral head (ONFH), which could provide a better understanding for the poor prognosis and treatment effects in L2 and L3 ONFH patients

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Femoral head collapse is the key to the progress of osteonecrosis of the femoral head (ONFH), but the causes of collapse are not completely clear. The better understanding of the progress of femoral head collapse will guide the treatment strategy for ONFH patients. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the biomechanical influence of necrosis area on the collapse of the femoral head by finite element analysis. Femoral head collapse is the most significant pathogenic complication of ONFH that requires total hip replacement eventually. These have motivated the recent studies to focus on the mechanism of the femoral head collapse in ONFH patients. Traditional biomechanical analysis and finite element (FE) method were used to study the causes of femoral head collapse [4,5,6]. There are some shortcomings in their research, such as the FE model design is relatively simple, only one of the factors is analyzed, and the classification is not considered [6, 14, 15]

Objectives
Methods
Results
Discussion
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

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.