Open AccessFinite Element Modelling for Assessing Effect of Acetabular Component Orientation on the Basic Stress Path above Acetabular Dome
Author(s) -
Nie Yong,
Pei Fuxing,
Li Zongming
Publication year - 2015
Publication title -
orthopaedic surgery
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.666
H-Index - 23
eISSN - 1757-7861
pISSN - 1757-7853
DOI - 10.1111/os.12148
Subject(s) - acetabulum , dome (geology) , biomechanics , stress (linguistics) , orientation (vector space) , finite element method , orthodontics , materials science , medicine , geology , anatomy , structural engineering , geometry , mathematics , engineering , paleontology , linguistics , philosophy
Objective To investigate the effect of acetabular component orientation on the basic stress path above the acetabular dome in the recommended safe zone. Methods A subject‐specific normal hip finite element model was generated and a convergence study carried out to determine the number of material properties for trabecular bone using a normal hip model. Four abduction angles (35°, 40°, 45° and 50°) and four anteversion angles (10°, 15°, 20° and 25°) from the recommended safe zone of acetabular cup orientation were chosen to simulate acetabular reconstruction. The distribution and level of periacetabular stress was assessed using a normal hip model as a control and 16 reconstructed acetabula in simulated single‐legged stances. Results The error of the average stress between plans four and five (50 and 100 materials for trabecular bone respectively) was 4.8%, which is less than the previously defined 5% error. The effect of acetabular component orientation on stress distribution in trabecular bone was not pronounced. When the acetabular component was at 15° anteversion and the abduction angle was 40° or 45°, the stress level on posterolateral cortical bone above the acetabular dome was as stable as that in the normal hip model. Conclusions Acetabular component orientation affects the basic stress path above the acetabular dome. Thus, orientation should be considered when attempting to restore normal biomechanics in the main load‐bearing area.