Comparative biomechanical analysis of stresses of the «bone – implant» system in endoprosthetics of the radial head

Authors

  • Sergey Strafun
  • Igor Boyko
  • Volodimir Lipovsky
  • Vasyl Makarov
  • Dmitriy Shcherbakov

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.15674/0030-59872017318-25

Keywords:

radial head, radial head endoprosthesis, «bone – implant», finite element, biomechanical analysis, stress-strain state

Abstract

Objective: to conduct a comparative analysis of stress distribution in the bone and implant system for various cases of the elbow joint flexion and supination in the endoprosthesis of the radial head with a developed bipolar implant and bipolar endoprosthesis KPS.

Methods: based on data provided by Zygote Media Group, Inc., a geometric model was created. In order to maximally repeat the biomechanics of the elbow joint in the model and the calculation schemes, cartilage surfaces and ligaments of the elbow joint are added. Using the SolidWorks and ANSYS software, a finite-element model was created, and then the calculation and visualization of the results were performed. In total, 45 geometric models were examined for 15 cases: for normal elbow joint, models with bipolar radial head endoprosthesis — developed and KPS.

Results: it was established that all elements of the developed bipolar radial head endoprosthesis meet the requirements of durability and toughness of the working structure. The values of stress and strains are compared with the values obtained for a model in a healthy elbow joint. In the «bone – implant» system, under the conditions of the radial head endoprosthesis, the developed bipolar implant and endoprosthesis KPS did not reveal significant differences in stress and strain fields in implants and in the structures of the elbow joint. The deformation fields that arise in the developed bipolar radial head endoprosthesis radial head had a smaller deviation from deformations of the normal joint compared to the KPS endoprosthesis.

Conclusions: the developed bipolar radial head endoprosthesis with a pair of friction «metal – metal» does not exert a critical influence on the articular surfaces and the connective device of the elbow joint.

Author Biographies

Sergey Strafun

SI «Institute of Traumatology and Orthopaedy NAMS of Ukraine», Kyiv

MD, Prof. in Traumatology and Orthopaedics

strafun-s@ukr.net

Igor Boyko

SE «Scientific Practical Center for Prophylactic and Clinical Medicine» State Administration, Kyiv. Ukraine

MD, Prof.

boyko.igor059@ukr.net

Volodimir Lipovsky

Dnipro National University O. Honchar. Ukraine

PhD in Technical Sci.

lealvi@ukr.net

Vasyl Makarov

SE «Specialized Multidisciplinary Hospital № 1 of the Ministry of Health of Ukraine», Dnipro

PhD in Traumatology and Orthopaedics

vasylmakarov2010@gmail.com

Dmitriy Shcherbakov

СI «CH № 10» Kryvyy Rih. Ukraine

scherbakovcable@mail.ru

References

  1. Broberg M, Morrey B. Results of treatment of fracture-dislocations of the elbow. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1987;216:109–19.
  2. Hartzler RU, Morrey BF, Steinmann SP, Llusa-Perez M, Sanchez-Sotelo J. Radial head reconstruction in elbow fracture-dislocation: monopolar or bipolar prosthesis. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2014;472(7):2144–50. doi: 10.1007/s11999-014-3672-0.
  3. Morrey B, Celli A, Celli L. Radial head prosthetic replacement with the Avanta Implant. Treatment of elbow lesions. Springer Milan, 2008. рр. 167–74.
  4. Morrey B. The elbow and its disorders. 3rd ed. Philadelphia, London, New York : W. B. Saunders Company, 2000. 934 p.
  5. Moon JG, Berglund LJ, Zachary D, An KN, O’Driscoll SW. Radiocapitellar joint stability with bipolar versus monopolar radial head prostheses. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2009;18(5):779–84. doi: 10.1016/j.jse.2009.02.011.
  6. Arbter D, Piatek S, Probst A, Holmenschlager F, Winckler S. Results after Judet radial head prosthesis for nonreconstructable radial head fractures. Unfallchirurg. 2012;115(11):1000–8.doi: 10.1007/s00113-011-1990-1.
  7. Swieszkowski W, Skalski K, Pomianowski S, Kedzior K. The anatomic features of the radial head and their implication for prosthesis design. Clin Biomech. 2001;16(10):880–7.
  8. Skalski K, Swieszkowski W, Pomianowski S, Kedzior K, Kowalik S. Radial head prosthesis with a mobile head. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2004;13(1):78–85. doi: 10.1016/j.jse.2003.09.014.
  9. BoykoІV, MakarovVB, SherbakovDE, SabsayOV.Endoprothesis of radial head.Pat. No 83334 UA. (in Ukrainian)
  10. Boyko IV, Makarov VB, Shcherbakov DE, et al. Biomechanical study of the distribution of loads in the head and neck of the radius. Visnik of orthopedics, traumatology and prosthetics. 2013;1:22-7.(in Russian)
  11. Markolf KL, Lamey D, Yang S, Meals R, Hotchkiss R. Radioulnar loadsharing in the forearm. A study in cadavera. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1998;80-A:879–88.
  12. Markolf KL, Dunbar AM, Hannani K. Mechanisms of load transfer in the cadaver forearm: role of the interosseous membrane. J Hand Surg. Am. 2000;25(4):674–82. doi: 10.1053/jhsu.2000.8640.
  13. Morrey BF, An KN, Stormont TJ. Force transmission through the radial head. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1988;70:250–6.
  14. Jensen SL, Olsen BS, Sojbjerg JO. Elbow joint kinematics after excision of the radial head. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 1999;8:238–241.
  15. Trushko AV, Chizhik SA. ASM-analysis of cartilaginous tissue : Mater. VII Intern. seminar (Minsk, 1-3 November 2006). Minsk: ITMO NAS of Belarus, 2006, рр. 162-168 (in Russian)
  16. Kim S. Contact stress analysis of the native radial head and radial head implants: Doctoral Dissertation. University of Pittsburgh, 2014. 119 p.

Downloads

How to Cite

Strafun, S., Boyko, I., Lipovsky, V., Makarov, V., & Shcherbakov, D. (2017). Comparative biomechanical analysis of stresses of the «bone – implant» system in endoprosthetics of the radial head. ORTHOPAEDICS TRAUMATOLOGY and PROSTHETICS, (3), 18–25. https://doi.org/10.15674/0030-59872017318-25

Issue

No. 3 (2017)

Section

ORIGINAL ARTICLES

License

Copyright (c) 2017 Sergey Strafun, Igor Boyko, Volodimir Lipovsky, Vasyl Makarov, Dmitriy Shcherbakov

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

The authors retain the right of authorship of their manuscript and pass the journal the right of the first publication of this article, which automatically become available from the date of publication under the terms of Creative Commons Attribution License, which allows others to freely distribute the published manuscript with mandatory linking to authors of the original research and the first publication of this one in this journal.

Authors have the right to enter into a separate supplemental agreement on the additional non-exclusive distribution of manuscript in the form in which it was published by the journal (i.e. to put work in electronic storage of an institution or publish as a part of the book) while maintaining the reference to the first publication of the manuscript in this journal.

The editorial policy of the journal allows authors and encourages manuscript accommodation online (i.e. in storage of an institution or on the personal websites) as before submission of the manuscript to the editorial office, and during its editorial processing because it contributes to productive scientific discussion and positively affects the efficiency and dynamics of the published manuscript citation (see The Effect of Open Access).