Finite element analysis of mechanical properties of distal humeral hemiarthroplasty prostheses
10.3760/cma.j.cn115530-20250512-00198
- VernacularTitle:肱骨远端半肘关节假体力学性能的有限元分析
- Author:
Hailong ZHANG
1
;
Renjie CHEN
1
;
Yi LU
1
Author Information
1. 首都医科大学附属北京积水潭医院运动医学科，北京 100035
- Publication Type:Journal Article
- Keywords:
Bioprosthesis;
Elbow joint;
Arthroplasty;
Finite element analysis;
Biomechanics
- From:
Chinese Journal of Orthopaedic Trauma
2025;27(8):702-708
- CountryChina
- Language:Chinese
-
Abstract:
Objective:To compare the differences in the maximum stress distribution between bone-only and osteochondral composite distal humeral hemiarthroplasty prostheses under various physiological motion states using a finite element analysis.Methods:High-resolution CT scan data from 7 fresh-frozen cadaveric elbow specimens [5 males, 2 females; 4 left and 3 right sides; age: (40.4±5.9) years] were used to reconstruct three-dimensional models of bony structures and cartilage. Two types of distal humeral hemiarthroplasty prostheses were designed using reverse engineering techniques: bone-only (bone prosthesis group) and osteochondral composite (osteochondral prosthesis group). At 4 flexion-extension angles (0°, 30°, 90°, 130°) and 3 rotational positions (neutral, pronation, supination), the maximum stress distributions in the native bones and 2 types of prostheses were systematically evaluated and compared using finite element analysis to investigate the differences in mechanical performance under physiological motion conditions.Results:Under a 200 N axial load and at 0°, 30°, 90°, and 130°, respectively, the maximum von Mises stress in the elbow joint model was (11.64±1.12) MPa, (12.62±1.15) MPa, (11.73±0.99) MPa, and (11.67±1.08) MPa in the native bone group, (13.60±1.75) MPa, (14.97±2.09) MPa, (13.62±1.84) MPa, and (13.70±1.91) MPa in the bone prosthesis group, and (12.45±1.57) MPa, (13.79±1.56) MPa, (12.44±1.55) MPa, and (12.72±1.29) MPa in the osteochondral prosthesis group. In neutral position, pronation and supination, the maximum von Mises stress in the elbow joint model was, respectively, (11.72±1.17) MPa, (11.68±1.22) MPa, and (12.36±0.94) MPa in the native bone group, (13.69±1.72) MPa, (13.07±1.26) MPa, and (15.15±2.20) MPa in the bone prosthesis group, and (13.02±1.32) MPa, (13.39±1.92) MPa, and (12.15±1.13) MPa in the osteochondral prosthesis group. Two way ANOVA showed that the main effects of flexion-extension angles and of rotation states were significantly different in the 3 groups of models ( P<0.05). The interaction effects between flexion-extension angle and prosthesis was significantly different( P<0.05), but interaction effects between rotational position and prosthesis is not significantly different ( P>0.05). The maximum stresses at the prosthesis in all the flexion-extension angles in the bone prosthesis group were significantly higher than those in the other 2 groups ( P<0.05). In neutral position and pronation, the maximum stresses in the bone prosthesis group and osteochondral prosthesis group were significantly higher than that in the native bone group ( P<0.05). In supination, the maximum stress in the bone prosthesis group was significantly higher than that in the osteochondral prosthesis group and in the native bone group ( P<0.05), but there was no such a significant difference between the latter 2 groups ( P>0.05). Conclusions:Preservation of the cartilaginous structure effectively reduces stress concentration in distal humeral hemiarthroplasty prostheses. The osteochondral composite design demonstrates significantly better mechanical performance than the bone-only prosthesis design, suggesting its distinct advantages in replicating the natural mechanical environment of a joint.
