5
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Biomechanical effect of intertrochanteric curved varus osteotomy on stress reduction in femoral head osteonecrosis: a finite element analysis

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background

          Intertrochanteric curved varus osteotomy (CVO) has been widely used to remove the necrotic bone away from the weight-bearing portion in the treatment of osteonecrosis of the femoral head (ONFH). However, whether all types of necrosis will benefit from CVO, in terms of the stress level, the effect of different center-edge (CE) angles of acetabulum on stress distribution of necrosis after CVO, and the relationship between the intact ratio and the stress of necrosis, has never been addressed. The purpose of the study was to evaluate the influence of CVO on the stress reduction in necrotic bone using a finite element analysis (FEA) with different CE angles.

          Methods

          CVO finite element models of the hip joint were simulated with a lesion of 60°. The osteotomy angles were divided into four configurations (15°, 20°, 25°, and 30°), and three types (A, B, and C1) of lesions were established based on the Japanese Investigation Committee (JIC) classification. In addition, two CE angles (18° and 33°) of acetabulum were considered. The maximum and mean von Mises stress were analyzed in terms of the necrotic bone by a physiological loading condition. Moreover, the correlation of the intact ratio measured in 3D and the stress distribution after CVO was analyzed.

          Results

          Stress reduction was obtained after CVO. For type B, the CVO angle was 20° (0.61 MPa), and for type C1, the CVO angle was 30° (0.77 MPa), if the mean stress level was close to type A (0.61 MPa), as a standard. The maximum and mean von Mises stress were higher in the CE angle of 18°models, respectively. The intact ratio measured in 3D had a good negative correlation with stress after CVO and had more influence on stress distribution in comparison to other geometric parameters.

          Conclusions

          For making decisions about the biomechanics of CVO, a CVO angle of > 20° was recommended for type B and > 30° was safe for type C1. The risk of progressive collapse was increased in the insufficient situation of the weight-bearing portion after CVO. The intact ratio could provide information about clinical outcomes and stress distribution after CVO.

          Related collections

          Most cited references49

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Is my model good enough? Best practices for verification and validation of musculoskeletal models and simulations of movement.

          Computational modeling and simulation of neuromusculoskeletal (NMS) systems enables researchers and clinicians to study the complex dynamics underlying human and animal movement. NMS models use equations derived from physical laws and biology to help solve challenging real-world problems, from designing prosthetics that maximize running speed to developing exoskeletal devices that enable walking after a stroke. NMS modeling and simulation has proliferated in the biomechanics research community over the past 25 years, but the lack of verification and validation standards remains a major barrier to wider adoption and impact. The goal of this paper is to establish practical guidelines for verification and validation of NMS models and simulations that researchers, clinicians, reviewers, and others can adopt to evaluate the accuracy and credibility of modeling studies. In particular, we review a general process for verification and validation applied to NMS models and simulations, including careful formulation of a research question and methods, traditional verification and validation steps, and documentation and sharing of results for use and testing by other researchers. Modeling the NMS system and simulating its motion involves methods to represent neural control, musculoskeletal geometry, muscle-tendon dynamics, contact forces, and multibody dynamics. For each of these components, we review modeling choices and software verification guidelines; discuss variability, errors, uncertainty, and sensitivity relationships; and provide recommendations for verification and validation by comparing experimental data and testing robustness. We present a series of case studies to illustrate key principles. In closing, we discuss challenges the community must overcome to ensure that modeling and simulation are successfully used to solve the broad spectrum of problems that limit human mobility.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Trabecular bone modulus-density relationships depend on anatomic site.

            One outstanding issue regarding the relationship between elastic modulus and density for trabecular bone is whether the relationship depends on anatomic site. To address this, on-axis elastic moduli and apparent densities were measured for 142 specimens of human trabecular bone from the vertebra (n=61), proximal tibia (n=31), femoral greater trochanter (n=23), and femoral neck (n=27). Specimens were obtained from 61 cadavers (mean+/-SD age=67+/-15 years). Experimental protocols were used that minimized end-artifact errors and controlled for specimen orientation. Tissue moduli were computed for a subset of 18 specimens using high-resolution linear finite element analyses and also using two previously developed theoretical relationships (Bone 25 (1999) 481; J. Elasticity 53 (1999) 125). Resultant power law regressions between modulus and density did depend on anatomic site, as determined via an analysis of covariance. The inter-site differences were among the leading coefficients (p 0.08), which ranged 1.49-2.18. At a given density, specimens from the tibia had higher moduli than those from the vertebra (p=0.01) and femoral neck (p=0.002); those from the trochanter had higher moduli than the vertebra (p=0.02). These differences could be as large as almost 50%, and errors in predicted values of modulus increased by up to 65% when site-dependence was ignored. These results indicate that there is no universal modulus-density relationship for on-axis loading. Tissue moduli computed using methods that account for inter-site architectural variations did not differ across site (p>0.15), suggesting that the site-specificity in apparent modulus-density relationships may be attributed to differences in architecture.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Verification, validation, and confirmation of numerical models in the Earth sciences.

              Verification and validation of numerical models of natural systems is impossible. This is because natural systems are never closed and because model results are always nonunique. Models can be confirmed by the demonstration of agreement between observation and prediction, but confirmation is inherently partial. Complete confirmation is logically precluded by the fallacy of affirming the consequent and by incomplete access to natural phenomena. Models can only be evaluated in relative terms, and their predictive value is always open to question. The primary value of models is heuristic.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                gyokuchu_oo@med.miyazaki-u.ac.jp
                g.yamako@cc.miyazaki-u.ac.jp
                hj16049@student.miyazaki-u.ac.jp
                hideaki_arakawa@med.miyazaki-u.ac.jp
                yoshihiro_nakamura@med.miyazaki-u.ac.jp
                chosa@med.miyazaki-u.ac.jp
                Journal
                J Orthop Surg Res
                J Orthop Surg Res
                Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Research
                BioMed Central (London )
                1749-799X
                23 July 2021
                23 July 2021
                2021
                : 16
                : 465
                Affiliations
                [1 ]GRID grid.410849.0, ISNI 0000 0001 0657 3887, Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Faculty of Medicine, , University of Miyazaki, ; Miyazaki, Miyazaki Japan
                [2 ]GRID grid.410849.0, ISNI 0000 0001 0657 3887, Department of Mechanical Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, , University of Miyazaki, ; Miyazaki, Miyazaki Japan
                [3 ]GRID grid.410849.0, ISNI 0000 0001 0657 3887, Graduate school of Engineering, , University of Miyazaki, ; Miyazaki, Miyazaki Japan
                Author information
                http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9270-0212
                Article
                2614
                10.1186/s13018-021-02614-z
                8299639
                34301290
                2678d799-f2db-42d0-bb5e-5ec2f5a6be7a
                © The Author(s) 2021

                Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver ( http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.

                History
                : 1 April 2021
                : 13 July 2021
                Funding
                Funded by: FundRef http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/501100001691, Japan Society for the Promotion of Science;
                Award ID: JP17K01362
                Award Recipient :
                Categories
                Research Article
                Custom metadata
                © The Author(s) 2021

                Surgery
                Surgery

                Comments

                Comment on this article