Bionic Reconstruction of Tension Trabeculae in Short-stem Hip Arthroplasty: a Finite Element Analysis

Overview

Journal BMC Musculoskelet Disord

Publisher Biomed Central

Specialties Orthopedics
Physiology

Date 2023 Feb 2

PMID 36732725

Authors

Zhentao Ding

Jun Wang

Yanhua Wang

Xiaomeng Zhang

Yong Huan

Dianying Zhang

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Background: Short-stem hip arthroplasty (SHA) is characterized by metaphyseal load transfer that effectively preserves the bone stock, but still suffers from stress shielding in the proximal femur. We designed a tension screw to mimic tension trabeculae in the new bionic collum femoris preserving (BCFP) short stem for bionic reconstruction, aiming to restore the biomechanics of hip joint.

Methods: Native femur finite element model was constructed to investigate the biomechanics of hip joint based on computed tomography (CT) data. The maximum absolute principal stress/strain cloud chart allowed the direction of stress/strain to be assessed. Six BCFP models with different screw angles (5°, 10°, 15°, 20°, 25°, and 30°) and the Corail model were created. The stress/strain distribution and overall stiffness were compared between each of the BCFP and Corail implanted models.

Results: The native model visualized the transfer pathways of tensile and compressive stress. The BCFP stems showed significantly higher stress and strain distribution in the greater trochanteric region compared to conventional total hip arthroplasty (THA). In particular, the BCFP-5° stem demonstrated the highest average strain in both medial and lateral regions and the overall stiffness was closest to the intact femur.

Conclusions: Stress transfer pathways of trabecular architecture provide biomechanical insight that serves as the basis for bionic reconstruction. The tension screw improves load transfer pattern in the proximal femur and prevents stress reduction in the greater trochanteric region. The BCFP-5° stem minimizes the stress shielding effect and presents a more bionic mechanical performance.

Citing Articles

Regional distribution of microvasculature within the canine femoral head: a study of plastinated tissue histology and 3D reconstruction.

Alam Shah M, Tang W, Ma Y, Zhe W, Yu S, Sui H J Orthop Surg Res. 2025; 20(1):170.

PMID: 39962538 PMC: 11834394. DOI: 10.1186/s13018-025-05522-8.

Finite Element Analysis of Proximal Femoral Bionic Nail (PFBN), Proximal Femoral Nail Antirotation and InterTan for Treatment of Reverse Obliquity Intertrochanteric Fractures.

Xiong C, Zhang L, Wang Y, Zhang X, Chen X, Yu K Orthop Surg. 2025; 17(3):888-899.

PMID: 39865505 PMC: 11872354. DOI: 10.1111/os.14345.

References

Bieger R, Ignatius A, Reichel H, Durselen L . Biomechanics of a short stem: In vitro primary stability and stress shielding of a conservative cementless hip stem. J Orthop Res. 2013; 31(8):1180-6. DOI: 10.1002/jor.22349. View

Stolk J, Verdonschot N, Huiskes R . Hip-joint and abductor-muscle forces adequately represent in vivo loading of a cemented total hip reconstruction. J Biomech. 2001; 34(7):917-26. DOI: 10.1016/s0021-9290(00)00225-6. View

Sumner D . Long-term implant fixation and stress-shielding in total hip replacement. J Biomech. 2015; 48(5):797-800. DOI: 10.1016/j.jbiomech.2014.12.021. View

van Loon J, Vervest A, van der Vis H, Sierevelt I, Baas D, Opdam K . Ceramic-on-ceramic articulation in press-fit total hip arthroplasty as a potential reason for early failure, what about the survivors: a ten year follow-up. Int Orthop. 2021; 45(6):1447-1454. PMC: 8178149. DOI: 10.1007/s00264-020-04895-1. View

Stulberg S, Patel R . The short stem: promises and pitfalls. Bone Joint J. 2013; 95-B(11 Suppl A):57-62. DOI: 10.1302/0301-620X.95B11.32936. View

Lengsfeld M, Kaminsky J, Merz B, Franke R . Sensitivity of femoral strain pattern analyses to resultant and muscle forces at the hip joint. Med Eng Phys. 1996; 18(1):70-8. DOI: 10.1016/1350-4533(95)00033-x. View

Taylor M . Finite element analysis of the resurfaced femoral head. Proc Inst Mech Eng H. 2006; 220(2):289-97. DOI: 10.1243/095441105x93631. View

Vogel D, Wehmeyer M, Kebbach M, Heyer H, Bader R . Stress and strain distribution in femoral heads for hip resurfacing arthroplasty with different materials: A finite element analysis. J Mech Behav Biomed Mater. 2020; 113:104115. DOI: 10.1016/j.jmbbm.2020.104115. View

Ciarelli M, Goldstein S, Kuhn J, Cody D, Brown M . Evaluation of orthogonal mechanical properties and density of human trabecular bone from the major metaphyseal regions with materials testing and computed tomography. J Orthop Res. 1991; 9(5):674-82. DOI: 10.1002/jor.1100090507. View

10.

Weinans H, Sumner D, Igloria R, Natarajan R . Sensitivity of periprosthetic stress-shielding to load and the bone density-modulus relationship in subject-specific finite element models. J Biomech. 2000; 33(7):809-17. DOI: 10.1016/s0021-9290(00)00036-1. View

11.

Maccagnano G, Pesce V, Vicenti G, Noia G, Coviello M, Bortone I . The effect of combined drug therapy in lateral fragility fractures of the femur: a prospective observational study. Eur Rev Med Pharmacol Sci. 2022; 26(1 Suppl):43-52. DOI: 10.26355/eurrev_202211_30281. View

12.

Lerch M, Windhagen H, Kurtz A, Budde S, Behrens B, Bouguecha A . 'Pre-launch' finite element analysis of a short-stem total hip arthroplasty system consisting of two implant types. Clin Biomech (Bristol). 2018; 61:31-37. DOI: 10.1016/j.clinbiomech.2018.11.002. View

13.

Brinkmann V, Radetzki F, Delank K, Wohlrab D, Zeh A . A prospective randomized radiographic and dual-energy X-ray absorptiometric study of migration and bone remodeling after implantation of two modern short-stemmed femoral prostheses. J Orthop Traumatol. 2015; 16(3):237-43. PMC: 4559543. DOI: 10.1007/s10195-015-0335-1. View

14.

Knutsen A, Lau N, Longjohn D, Ebramzadeh E, Sangiorgio S . Periprosthetic femoral bone loss in total hip arthroplasty: systematic analysis of the effect of stem design. Hip Int. 2016; 27(1):26-34. DOI: 10.5301/hipint.5000413. View

15.

Ong K, Kurtz S, Manley M, Rushton N, Mohammed N, Field R . Biomechanics of the Birmingham hip resurfacing arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2006; 88(8):1110-5. DOI: 10.1302/0301-620X.88B8.17567. View

16.

Karachalios T, Palaiochorlidis E, Komnos G . Clinical relevance of bone remodelling around conventional and conservative (short-stem) total hip arthroplasty implants. Hip Int. 2018; 29(1):4-6. DOI: 10.1177/1120700018810846. View

17.

Parchi P, Cervi V, Piolanti N, Ciapini G, Andreani L, Castellini I . Densitometric evaluation of periprosthetic bone remodeling. Clin Cases Miner Bone Metab. 2015; 11(3):226-31. PMC: 4269148. View

18.

Fischer M, Beckmann N, Simank H . Bone remodelling around the Metha short stem implant - Clinical and dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry (DXA) results. J Orthop. 2017; 14(4):525-529. PMC: 5568870. DOI: 10.1016/j.jor.2017.08.007. View

19.

Parchi P, Ciapini G, Castellini I, Mannucci C, Nucci A, Piolanti N . Evaluation of the Effects of the Metha® Short Stem on Periprosthetic Bone Remodelling in Total Hip Arthroplasties: Results at 48 Months. Surg Technol Int. 2017; 30:346-351. View

20.

Gotze C, Ehrenbrink J, Ehrenbrink H . [Is there a bone-preserving bone remodelling in short-stem prosthesis? DEXA analysis with the Nanos total hip arthroplasty]. Z Orthop Unfall. 2010; 148(4):398-405. DOI: 10.1055/s-0030-1250151. View