Back to Search Start Over

A finite element analysis of a low-profile femoral neck system of screws in sleeves in a vertical femoral neck fracture model

A finite element analysis of a low-profile femoral neck system of screws in sleeves in a vertical femoral neck fracture model

Authors :
Jun Sun
Le Wu
Nan Fang
Wenze Qiao
Lifeng Liu
Source :
BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders, Vol 25, Iss 1, Pp 1-14 (2024)
Publication Year :
2024
Publisher :
BMC, 2024.

Abstract

Abstract Background Femoral neck system (FNS) has exhibited some drawbacks, such as non-fit of the plate with the lateral femoral cortex, postoperative pain, and the potential risk of subtrochanteric fractures. We have developed a low-profile FNS system that addresses some compatibility issues in FNS. In this study, we conducted finite element analysis on the 1-hole FNS (1 H-FNS), 2-holes FNS (2 H-FNS), and low-profile FNS (LP-FNS) and compared their biomechanical performance. Methods After the mesh convergence analysis, we established three groups of 1 H-FNS, 2 H-FNS, and LP-FNS. The interfragmentary gap, sliding distance, shear stress, and compressive stress and the bone-implant interface compression stress, stiffness, and displacement were determined under the neutral, flexion, or extension conditions of the hip joint, respectively. The stress and displacement of the femur after the implant removal were also investigated. Results (1) There were no obvious differences among the three FNS groups in terms of the IFM distance. However, the LP-FNS group showed less rotational angle compared with conventional FNS (neutral: 1 H-FNS, -61.64%; 2 H-FNS, -45.40%). Also, the maximum bone-implant interface compression stress was obviously decreased under the neutral, flexion, or extension conditions of the hip joint (1 H-FNS: -6.47%, -20.59%, or -4.49%; 2 H-FNS: -3.11%, 16.70%, or -7.03%; respectively). (2) After the implant removal, there was no notable difference in the maximum displacement between the three groups, but the maximum von Mises stress displayed a notable difference between LP-FNS and 1 H-FNS groups (-15.27%) except for the difference between LP-FNS and 2 H-FNS groups (-4.57%). Conclusions The LP-FNS may not only provide the same biomechanical stabilities as the 1 H-FNS and 2 H-FNS, but also have more advantages in rotational resistance especially under the neutral condition of the hip joint, in the bone-implant interface compression stress, and after the implant removal. In addition, the 1 H-FNS and 2 H-FNS have similar biomechanical stabilities except for the maximum von Mises stress after the implant removal. The femur after the LP-FNS removal not only is subjected to relatively little stress but also minimizes stress concentration areas.

Details

Language :
English
ISSN :
14712474
Volume :
25
Issue :
1
Database :
Directory of Open Access Journals
Journal :
BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders
Publication Type :
Academic Journal
Accession number :
edsdoj.65442a34db904e15b563af3d5adf807d
Document Type :
article
Full Text :
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12891-024-07550-7