An original method of simulating the articular cartilage in the context of <em>in vitro</em> biomechanical studies investigating the proximal femur

Gheorghevici,Teodor Stefan; Carata,Eugen; Sirbu,Paul-Dan; Alexa,Ovidiu; Poroh,Manuela-Gabi; Filip,Alexandru; Forna,Norin; Puha,Bogdan

doi:10.3892/etm.2022.11125

An original method of simulating the articular cartilage in the context of in vitro biomechanical studies investigating the proximal femur

Authors:
- Teodor Stefan Gheorghevici
- Eugen Carata
- Paul-Dan Sirbu
- Ovidiu Alexa
- Manuela-Gabi Poroh
- Alexandru Filip
- Norin Forna
- Bogdan Puha
View Affiliations

Affiliations: Department of Orthopedics and Traumatology, ‘Sf. Spiridon’ County Clinical Emergency Hospital, 700111 Iasi, Romania, Department of Machine‑Tools and Equipment of The Faculty of Machine Constructions and Industrial Management, ‘Gheorghe Asachi’ Technical University, 700050 Iasi, Romania, Department of Orthopedics and Traumatology, Faculty of Medicine, ‘Grigore T. Popa’ University of Medicine and Pharmacy, 700115 Iasi, Romania
Published online on: January 5, 2022 https://doi.org/10.3892/etm.2022.11125
Article Number: 202
Copyright: © Gheorghevici et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of Creative Commons Attribution License.

Metrics: Total Views: 0 (Spandidos Publications: | PMC Statistics: )

Metrics: Total PDF Downloads: 0 (Spandidos Publications: | PMC Statistics: )

Cited By (CrossRef): 0 citations Loading Articles...

Abstract

Biomechanical testing is a necessity given the development of novel implants used in the osteosynthesis of hip fractures. The purpose of biomechanical testing is to recreate realistic conditions similar to the in vivo conditions. Although biomechanical testing of hip arthroplasty has been standardized since the 1970s, there is no consensus at present on testing methodology for osteosynthesis of hip fractures. Most biomechanical studies examining the fractures of the proximal femur in order to optimize implants opt for loading the bone‑implant ensemble directly on the femoral head or using a metallic loading part. This loading technique fails to perform a mechanical stress distribution similar to in vivo conditions, which could alter the outcome. The present study aimed to design loading/unloading cups with mechanical properties that resemble those of the cartilage at the hip level. Through the impression and scanning of the cast models obtained, a digital 3D model was created in STL format and this was processed in order to obtain the computer numerical control (CNC) trajectories of the printing head. For prototyping using additive manufacturing technology, a thermoplastic polymer with biochemical properties, such as tensile strength, that resemble those of the adult hip and a Stratasys FORTUS 250 mc CNC machine were used. Loading/unloading cups with similar anatomy and biomechanical forces compared with those of the adult hip were created, which allowed the experimental simulation of the conditions during walking.

View Figures

View References

1	Wang J, Ma JX, Jia HB, Chen Y, Yang Y and Ma XL: Biomechanical evaluation of four methods for internal fixation of comminuted subtrochanteric fractures. Medicine (Baltimore). 95(e3382)2016.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar
2	Schaefer TK, Spross C, Stoffel KK and Yates PJ: Biomechanical properties of a posterior fully threaded positioning screw for cannulated screw fixation of displaced neck of femur fractures. Injury. 46:2130–2133. 2015.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar
3	Röderer G, Moll S, Gebhard F, Claes L and Krischak G: Side plate fixation vs. intramedullary nailing in an unstable medial femoral neck fracture model: A comparative biomechanical study. Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon). 26:141–146. 2011.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar
4	Windolf M, Braunstein V, Dutoit C and Schwieger K: Is a helical shaped implant a superior alternative to the Dynamic Hip Screw for unstable femoral neck fractures? A biomechanical investigation. Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon). 24:59–64. 2009.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar
5	Strauss E, Frank J, Lee J, Kummer FJ and Tejwani N: Helical blade versus sliding hip screw for treatment of unstable intertrochanteric hip fractures: A biomechanical evaluation. Injury. 37:984–989. 2006.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar
6	Rosenblum SF, Zuckerman JD, Kummer FJ and Tam BS: A biomechanical evaluation of the Gamma nail. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 74:352–357. 1992.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar
7	Santoni BG, Nayak AN, Cooper SA, Smithson IR, Cox JL, Marberry ST and Sanders RW: Comparison of femoral head rotation and varus collapse between a single lag screw and integrated dual screw intertrochanteric hip fracture fixation device using a cadaveric hemi-pelvis biomechanical model. J Orthop Trauma. 30:164–169. 2016.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar
8	Kane P, Vopat B, Heard W, Thakur N, Paller D, Koruprolu S and Born C: Is tip apex distance as important as we think? A biomechanical study examining optimal lag screw placement. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 472:2492–2498. 2014.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar
9	Basso T, Klaksvik J and Foss OA: Statistical consequences of using bone mineral density to pair cadaver femurs in comparative ex vivo hip fracture studies. Bone Joint Res. 3:317–320. 2014.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar
10	Basso T, Klaksvik J, Syversen U and Foss OA: A biomechanical comparison of composite femurs and cadaver femurs used in experiments on operated hip fractures. J Biomech. 47:3898–3902. 2014.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar
11	Deneka DA, Simonian PT, Stankewich CJ, Eckert D, Chapman JR and Tencer AF: Biomechanical comparison of internal fixation techniques for the treatment of unstable basicervical femoral neck fractures. J Orthop Trauma. 11:337–343. 1997.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar
12	Yoshida H, Faust A, Wilckens J, Kitagawa M, Fetto J and Chao EY: Three-dimensional dynamic hip contact area and pressure distribution during activities of daily living. J Biomech. 39:1996–2004. 2006.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar
13	Silver FH, Bradica G and Tria A: Elastic energy storage in human articular cartilage: Estimation of the elastic modulus for type II collagen and changes associated with osteoarthritis. Matrix Biol. 21:129–137. 2002.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar
14	Tack P, Victor J, Gemmel P and Annemans L: 3D-printing techniques in a medical setting: A systematic literature review. Biomed Eng Online. 15(115)2016.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar
15	Robles-Linares JA, Ramírez-Cedillo E, Siller HR, Rodríguez CA and Martínez-López JI: Parametric modeling of biomimetic cortical bone microstructure for additive manufacturing. Materials (Basel). 12(913)2019.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar
16	Reddy MV, Eachempati K, Gurava Reddy AV and Mugalur A: Error analysis: How precise is fused deposition modeling in fabrication of bone models in comparison to the parent bones? Indian J Orthop. 52:196–201. 2018.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar
17	Kempson GE: Age-related changes in the tensile properties of human articular cartilage: A comparative study between the femoral head of the hip joint and the talus of the ankle joint. Biochim Biophys Acta. 1075:223–230. 1991.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar
18	Silver FH, Bradica G and Tria A: Relationship among biomechanical, biochemical, and cellular changes associated with osteoarthritis. Crit Rev Biomed Eng. 29:373–391. 2001.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar