Biomechanical evaluation of implant techniques for ipsilateral femoral neck and shaft fractures: A finite element analysis

IF 3.3 2区 医学 Q2 ENGINEERING, BIOMEDICAL Journal of the Mechanical Behavior of Biomedical Materials Pub Date : 2025-01-23 DOI:10.1016/j.jmbbm.2025.106890
Yukun Xiao , Kui He , Xiaoqi Tan , Daiqing Wei , Jiyuan Yan , Yunkang Yang , Feifan Xiang
{"title":"Biomechanical evaluation of implant techniques for ipsilateral femoral neck and shaft fractures: A finite element analysis","authors":"Yukun Xiao ,&nbsp;Kui He ,&nbsp;Xiaoqi Tan ,&nbsp;Daiqing Wei ,&nbsp;Jiyuan Yan ,&nbsp;Yunkang Yang ,&nbsp;Feifan Xiang","doi":"10.1016/j.jmbbm.2025.106890","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Purpose</h3><div>No consensus has been reached regarding the treatment of ipsilateral femoral neck fractures and femoral shaft fractures (FNF + FSF). This study discusses the stability and differences between multiple single- and dual-implant strategies in the treatment of FNF + FSF and aims to provide a theoretical reference for clinical applications.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>Based on multi-sample finite element analysis, models of basicervical FNF (bFNFs Pauwels III) combined with three different FSFs (proximal (PFSF), middle (MFSF), and distal (DFSF)) were developed. Five implant strategies were established: (A) reconstructive nail (RN), (B) proximal femoral nail antirotation II (PFNA-II), (C) three cannulated compression screws + retrograde intramedullary nail (3CCS + RIN), (D) dynamic hip screw + antirotation screw (DHS + AS) + RIN, and (E) femoral neck system (FNS) + RIN. The biomechanical characteristic of FNF + FSF treated with five strategies were statistically analyzed.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>In most cases, there was no significant difference between the single- and dual-implant groups in the FSF gait cycle (at 0° hip joint pressure load or with FNF + MFSF). In other cases, the dual-implant group was predominant. Maximum mean stress of neck-screw: A (235.1 MPa) &gt; B (194.1 MPa) &gt; D (191.5 MPa) &gt; E (181.9 MPa) &gt; C (153.9 MPa) at 30° hip joint loading; A (137.9 MPa) &gt; E (126.3 MPa) &gt; B (105.5 MPa) &gt; D (104.1 MPa) &gt; C (89.30 MPa) at 0°; A (306.3 MPa) &gt; B (261.6 MPa) &gt; D (259.5 MPa) &gt; E (246.2 MPa) &gt; C (217.2 MPa) at −30°. Meanwhile, group C had the lowest fracture interface stress and relative displacement of bFNFs.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>Dual-implant strategy for combined fixation, which can effectively strengthen the integral structural stiffness of the femur, is recommended for FNF + FSF. 3CSS and DHS + AS in the dual-implant strategies have better regional stability of bFNFs.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":380,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the Mechanical Behavior of Biomedical Materials","volume":"164 ","pages":"Article 106890"},"PeriodicalIF":3.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of the Mechanical Behavior of Biomedical Materials","FirstCategoryId":"5","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1751616125000062","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ENGINEERING, BIOMEDICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose

No consensus has been reached regarding the treatment of ipsilateral femoral neck fractures and femoral shaft fractures (FNF + FSF). This study discusses the stability and differences between multiple single- and dual-implant strategies in the treatment of FNF + FSF and aims to provide a theoretical reference for clinical applications.

Methods

Based on multi-sample finite element analysis, models of basicervical FNF (bFNFs Pauwels III) combined with three different FSFs (proximal (PFSF), middle (MFSF), and distal (DFSF)) were developed. Five implant strategies were established: (A) reconstructive nail (RN), (B) proximal femoral nail antirotation II (PFNA-II), (C) three cannulated compression screws + retrograde intramedullary nail (3CCS + RIN), (D) dynamic hip screw + antirotation screw (DHS + AS) + RIN, and (E) femoral neck system (FNS) + RIN. The biomechanical characteristic of FNF + FSF treated with five strategies were statistically analyzed.

Results

In most cases, there was no significant difference between the single- and dual-implant groups in the FSF gait cycle (at 0° hip joint pressure load or with FNF + MFSF). In other cases, the dual-implant group was predominant. Maximum mean stress of neck-screw: A (235.1 MPa) > B (194.1 MPa) > D (191.5 MPa) > E (181.9 MPa) > C (153.9 MPa) at 30° hip joint loading; A (137.9 MPa) > E (126.3 MPa) > B (105.5 MPa) > D (104.1 MPa) > C (89.30 MPa) at 0°; A (306.3 MPa) > B (261.6 MPa) > D (259.5 MPa) > E (246.2 MPa) > C (217.2 MPa) at −30°. Meanwhile, group C had the lowest fracture interface stress and relative displacement of bFNFs.

Conclusion

Dual-implant strategy for combined fixation, which can effectively strengthen the integral structural stiffness of the femur, is recommended for FNF + FSF. 3CSS and DHS + AS in the dual-implant strategies have better regional stability of bFNFs.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
目的对于同侧股骨颈骨折和股骨干骨折(FNF + FSF)的治疗尚未达成共识。方法基于多样本有限元分析,建立了基本股骨颈骨折(bFNFs Pauwels III)与三种不同股骨干骨折(近端(PFSF)、中部(MFSF)和远端(DFSF))相结合的模型。建立了五种植入策略:(A) 重建钉(RN),(B) 股骨近端抗旋转钉 II(PFNA-II),(C) 三枚套管加压螺钉+逆行髓内钉(3CCS + RIN),(D) 动态髋螺钉+抗旋转螺钉(DHS + AS)+ RIN,以及 (E) 股骨颈系统(FNS)+ RIN。结果在大多数情况下,单假体组和双假体组在 FSF 步态周期(髋关节压力负荷为 0°或使用 FNF + MFSF)中没有显著差异。而在其他情况下,双假体组则占优势。颈部螺钉的最大平均应力:A(235.1 MPa);B(194.1 MPa);D(191.5 MPa);E(181.9 MPa);C(153.9 MPa);A(137.9 MPa);E(126.3 MPa);B(105.5 MPa);D(104.1 MPa);C(89.30 MPa);A(306.3 MPa);B(261.6 MPa);D(259.5 MPa);E(246.2 MPa);C(217.2 MPa)。同时,C 组的骨折界面应力和 bFNFs 的相对位移最小。双种植策略中的3CSS和DHS+AS具有更好的bFNFs区域稳定性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of the Mechanical Behavior of Biomedical Materials
Journal of the Mechanical Behavior of Biomedical Materials 工程技术-材料科学:生物材料
CiteScore
7.20
自引率
7.70%
发文量
505
审稿时长
46 days
期刊介绍: The Journal of the Mechanical Behavior of Biomedical Materials is concerned with the mechanical deformation, damage and failure under applied forces, of biological material (at the tissue, cellular and molecular levels) and of biomaterials, i.e. those materials which are designed to mimic or replace biological materials. The primary focus of the journal is the synthesis of materials science, biology, and medical and dental science. Reports of fundamental scientific investigations are welcome, as are articles concerned with the practical application of materials in medical devices. Both experimental and theoretical work is of interest; theoretical papers will normally include comparison of predictions with experimental data, though we recognize that this may not always be appropriate. The journal also publishes technical notes concerned with emerging experimental or theoretical techniques, letters to the editor and, by invitation, review articles and papers describing existing techniques for the benefit of an interdisciplinary readership.
期刊最新文献
Editorial Board Cytocompatibility, fibroblast adhesion and proliferation on surface modified 3D-printed PEEK scaffolds Editorial Board Bone mechanical behavior around dental implants: Densification and deformation follow-up by in-situ computed tomography Simulation of a Free Boundary Cell Migration Model through Physics Informed Neural Networks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1