{"title":"Influence of bone material behavior assumption on finite element-predicted tibia-implant micromotions in total ankle replacement","authors":"Joshua E. Johnson , Donald D. Anderson","doi":"10.1016/j.jbiomech.2025.112832","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Initial tibial implant stability is important for successful long-term outcome after uncemented total ankle replacement (TAR). Tibia-implant interfacial micromotion is consequently a key variable used to evaluate implant performance using finite element analysis (FEA). Our goal was to investigate how bone material behavior assumptions influence FEA-predicted tibia-implant interfacial micromotions. Five tibia geometries and their corresponding density distributions were acquired from CT scans of TAR patients. The corresponding models were then virtually implanted with two tibial implant designs. FEA was used to simulate loadings from the stance phase of gait with line-to-line implantation. FEA predictions of peak micromotions and von Mises stress differences were compared across each patient-implant configuration, when incorporating elastic–plastic versus only linear elastic bone material behavior (5 tibias × 2 implant designs × 2 tibia material behaviors). We found that peak micromotions trended larger (up to 69 % greater) when elastic–plastic bone material behavior was incorporated, and that larger differences in peak micromotions were seen with larger differences in peak interfacial von Mises stresses between simulations incorporating elastic–plastic versus linear elastic bone material behavior (r = −0.73, p < 0.001). The larger peak micromotions when elastic–plastic bone material behavior was incorporated were strongly associated with how much interfacial bone plasticly deformed (r = 0.92, p < 0.001). These results imply that tibia-implant interfacial micromotions are underestimated when bone is assumed to behave only as a linear elastic material. Thus, the results from such FEA simulations should be interpreted with caution, as they are likely conservative in their estimates of micromotion.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":15168,"journal":{"name":"Journal of biomechanics","volume":"189 ","pages":"Article 112832"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of biomechanics","FirstCategoryId":"5","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0021929025003446","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"BIOPHYSICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Initial tibial implant stability is important for successful long-term outcome after uncemented total ankle replacement (TAR). Tibia-implant interfacial micromotion is consequently a key variable used to evaluate implant performance using finite element analysis (FEA). Our goal was to investigate how bone material behavior assumptions influence FEA-predicted tibia-implant interfacial micromotions. Five tibia geometries and their corresponding density distributions were acquired from CT scans of TAR patients. The corresponding models were then virtually implanted with two tibial implant designs. FEA was used to simulate loadings from the stance phase of gait with line-to-line implantation. FEA predictions of peak micromotions and von Mises stress differences were compared across each patient-implant configuration, when incorporating elastic–plastic versus only linear elastic bone material behavior (5 tibias × 2 implant designs × 2 tibia material behaviors). We found that peak micromotions trended larger (up to 69 % greater) when elastic–plastic bone material behavior was incorporated, and that larger differences in peak micromotions were seen with larger differences in peak interfacial von Mises stresses between simulations incorporating elastic–plastic versus linear elastic bone material behavior (r = −0.73, p < 0.001). The larger peak micromotions when elastic–plastic bone material behavior was incorporated were strongly associated with how much interfacial bone plasticly deformed (r = 0.92, p < 0.001). These results imply that tibia-implant interfacial micromotions are underestimated when bone is assumed to behave only as a linear elastic material. Thus, the results from such FEA simulations should be interpreted with caution, as they are likely conservative in their estimates of micromotion.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Biomechanics publishes reports of original and substantial findings using the principles of mechanics to explore biological problems. Analytical, as well as experimental papers may be submitted, and the journal accepts original articles, surveys and perspective articles (usually by Editorial invitation only), book reviews and letters to the Editor. The criteria for acceptance of manuscripts include excellence, novelty, significance, clarity, conciseness and interest to the readership.
Papers published in the journal may cover a wide range of topics in biomechanics, including, but not limited to:
-Fundamental Topics - Biomechanics of the musculoskeletal, cardiovascular, and respiratory systems, mechanics of hard and soft tissues, biofluid mechanics, mechanics of prostheses and implant-tissue interfaces, mechanics of cells.
-Cardiovascular and Respiratory Biomechanics - Mechanics of blood-flow, air-flow, mechanics of the soft tissues, flow-tissue or flow-prosthesis interactions.
-Cell Biomechanics - Biomechanic analyses of cells, membranes and sub-cellular structures; the relationship of the mechanical environment to cell and tissue response.
-Dental Biomechanics - Design and analysis of dental tissues and prostheses, mechanics of chewing.
-Functional Tissue Engineering - The role of biomechanical factors in engineered tissue replacements and regenerative medicine.
-Injury Biomechanics - Mechanics of impact and trauma, dynamics of man-machine interaction.
-Molecular Biomechanics - Mechanical analyses of biomolecules.
-Orthopedic Biomechanics - Mechanics of fracture and fracture fixation, mechanics of implants and implant fixation, mechanics of bones and joints, wear of natural and artificial joints.
-Rehabilitation Biomechanics - Analyses of gait, mechanics of prosthetics and orthotics.
-Sports Biomechanics - Mechanical analyses of sports performance.