Influence of bone material behavior assumption on finite element-predicted tibia-implant micromotions in total ankle replacement

IF 2.4 3区 医学 Q3 BIOPHYSICS
Joshua E. Johnson , Donald D. Anderson
{"title":"Influence of bone material behavior assumption on finite element-predicted tibia-implant micromotions in total ankle replacement","authors":"Joshua E. Johnson ,&nbsp;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 &lt; 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 &lt; 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.
全踝关节置换术中骨材料行为假设对有限元预测胫骨植入体微运动的影响
胫骨植入物的初始稳定性对于非骨水泥全踝关节置换术(TAR)后成功的长期预后至关重要。因此,胫骨-种植体界面微动是使用有限元分析(FEA)评估种植体性能的关键变量。我们的目的是研究骨材料行为假设如何影响有限元预测的胫骨-种植体界面微运动。从TAR患者的CT扫描中获得5种胫骨几何形状及其相应的密度分布。然后将相应的模型虚拟植入两种胫骨植入物。采用有限元分析方法,从线对线植入步态的站立阶段对载荷进行模拟。当结合弹塑性与仅线弹性骨材料行为(5块胫骨× 2块植入物设计× 2块胫骨材料行为)时,比较了每种患者-植入物配置的峰值微运动和von Mises应力差异的有限元预测。我们发现,当结合弹塑性骨材料行为时,峰值微运动趋势更大(高达69%),并且在结合弹塑性与线弹性骨材料行为的模拟中,峰值界面冯米塞斯应力的差异更大,峰值微运动的差异也更大(r = - 0.73, p <;0.001)。当结合弹塑性骨材料行为时,较大的峰值微运动与界面骨塑性变形的程度密切相关(r = 0.92, p <;0.001)。这些结果表明,当骨被认为只是作为一种线弹性材料时,胫骨-植入物界面微运动被低估了。因此,这种有限元模拟的结果应该谨慎解释,因为它们在微运动估计中可能是保守的。
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 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal of biomechanics
Journal of biomechanics 生物-工程:生物医学
CiteScore
5.10
自引率
4.20%
发文量
345
审稿时长
1 months
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.
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信