Evaluation of the 3D Finite Element Method Using a Tantalum Rod for Osteonecrosis of the Femoral Head

Abstract

BackgroundThe aim of this study was to contrast the collapse values of the postoperative weight-bearing areas of different tantalum rod implant positions, fibula implantation, and core decompression model and to investigate the advantages and disadvantages of tantalum rod implantation in different ranges of osteonecrosis in comparison with other methods.Material/MethodsThe 3D finite element method was used to establish the 3D finite element model of normal upper femur, 3D finite element model after tantalum rod implantation into different positions of the upper femur in different osteonecrosis ranges, and other 3D finite element models for simulating fibula implant and core decompression.ResultsThe collapse values in the weight-bearing area of the femoral head of the tantalum rod implant model inside the osteonecrosis area, implant model in the middle of the osteonecrosis area, fibula implant model, and shortening implant model exhibited no statistically significant differences (p>0.05) when the osteonecrosis range was small (60°). The stress values on the artificial bone surface for the tantalum rod implant model inside the osteonecrosis area and the shortening implant model exhibited statistical significance (p<0.01).ConclusionsTantalum rod implantation into the osteonecrosis area can reduce the collapse values in the weight-bearing area when osteonecrosis of the femoral head (ONFH) was in a certain range, thereby obtaining better clinical effects. When ONFH was in a large range (120°), the tantalum rod implantation inside the osteonecrosis area, shortening implant or fibula implant can reduce the collapse values of the femoral head, as assessed by other methods.

Development of Femoral Head Interior Supporting Device and 3D Finite Element Analysis of its Application in the Treatment of Femoral Head Avascular Necrosis

“…Therefore, the tunnel decompression and bone graft clinically reduced the bone pressure, removed the dead bone tissue, stimulated the formation of blood vessels near the decompressed zone, enhanced the creeping substitution of the necrotic bone, eliminated the necrosis, and significantly reduced the hip pain. However, the biomechanical structure was also damaged, new stress concentration appeared, leading to trabecular microstructure fracture, weakening the mechanical strength of the femoral head, blocking the extension of the repair tissues, and delaying the repair of the subchondral bone, which in turn further affected the mechanical strength of the diseased femoral head and accelerated the process of collapse and necrosis [ 16 – 19 ].…”

Significance of Lateral Pillar in Osteonecrosis of Femoral Head

“…One important tool is finite element (FE) analysis. [ 14 15 16 17 18 ] In the present study, the FE model of an intact hip joint was constructed from data extracted by images of a set of six early osteonecrosis patients and a normal control. This FE model was developed based on the three-pillar classification of ONFH.…”

Biomechanical analysis of fibular graft techniques for nontraumatic osteonecrosis of the femoral head: a finite element analysis

“…Researchers have tried to use finite element analysis to investigate the biomechanical effectiveness of core decompression [ 24 ], rod implantation [ 27 , 28 ], and the CTT [ 19 ] in preserving the hip joint in NONFH surgeries. However, there have been no such investigations on the LBT.…”