Dataset Information

Finite element analysis of femoral neck strains during stair ascent and descent.

ABSTRACT: For older population, a better understanding of the hip joint loading environment is needed for the prevention of hip pain, and the reduction of the stress fractures and fall risks. Using the motion analysis and inverse dynamics methods, combined with musculoskeletal modelling, static optimization, and finite element (FE) femur model, the difference of femoral neck strains between stair ascent vs. descent, young vs. older populations was compared. A two-way repeated-measures MANOVA was applied to test the effect of age and stair direction on the femoral neck strains. The strains at the femoral neck cross-section were greater for stair descent than ascent for both age groups (mostly P = 0.001 to 0006) but there was no difference between age groups. In this study, femoral neck strains represented bone loading environment in more direct ways than joint reaction forces/moments or joint contact forces, the risk of hip pain, falls and stress fractures might be greater during stair descent than ascent. Possible preventative methods to reduce these risks should be developed in the future studies.

SUBMITTER: Deng C

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8080611 | biostudies-literature | 2021 Apr

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Finite element analysis of femoral neck strains during stair ascent and descent.

Deng Chen C Gillette Jason C JC Derrick Timothy R TR

Scientific reports 20210428 1

For older population, a better understanding of the hip joint loading environment is needed for the prevention of hip pain, and the reduction of the stress fractures and fall risks. Using the motion analysis and inverse dynamics methods, combined with musculoskeletal modelling, static optimization, and finite element (FE) femur model, the difference of femoral neck strains between stair ascent vs. descent, young vs. older populations was compared. A two-way repeated-measures MANOVA was applied t ...[more]

PMID: 33911099

Similar Datasets

Project description:PurposeTo investigate the differences of patellofemoral joint pressure and contact area between the process of stair ascent and stair descent.MethodsThe finite element models of 9 volunteers without disorders of knee (9 males) to estimate patellar cartilage pressure during the stair ascent and the stair descent. Simulations took into account cartilage morphology from magnetic resonance imaging, joint posture from weight-bearing magnetic resonance imaging, and ligament model. The three-dimension models of the patella, femur and tibia were developed with the medical image processing software, Mimics 11.1. The ligament was established by truss element of the non-linear FE solver. The equivalent gravity direction (-z direction) load was applied to the whole end of femur (femoral head) according to the body weight of the volunteers, and the force of patella was observed. A paired-samples t-test or Wilcoxon rank sum test to make comparisons between stair ascent and stair descent. Statistical analyses were performed using SPSS 22.0 using a P value of 0.05 to indicate significance.ResultsDuring the stair descent (knee flexion at 30°), the contact pressure of the patella was 2.59 ± 0.06Mpa. The contact pressure of femoral trochlea cartilage was 2.57 ± 0.06Mpa. During the stair ascent (knee flexion at 60°), the contact pressure with patellar cartilage was 2.82 ± 0.08Mpa. The contact pressure of the femoral trochlea cartilage was 3.03 ± 0.11Mpa. The contact area between patellar cartilage and femoral trochlea cartilage was 249.27 ± 1.35mm2 during the stair descent, which was less than 434.32 ± 1.70mm2 during the stair ascent. The area of high pressure was located in the lateral area of patella during stair descent and the area of high pressure was scattered during stair ascent.ConclusionThere are small change in the cartilage contact pressure between stair ascent and stair descent, indicating that the joint adjusts the contact pressure by increasing the contact area.

Project description:BackgroundAlthough total knee arthroplasty improves functional mobility in persons with end-stage knee osteoarthritis, many subjects have reported continued difficulty with stair ascent and descent after surgery. The purpose of the present study was to determine preoperative predictors of handrail use during stair ascent and descent following primary unilateral total knee arthroplasty.MethodsOne hundred and five adults who were scheduled for unilateral total knee arthroplasty participated in the study. Postoperative handrail use during stair ascent or descent was predicted on the basis of preoperative functional measures. Preoperative age, body mass index, knee strength, knee flexion active range of motion, Knee Outcome Survey scores, time to complete a stair-climbing task, and previous handrail use were entered as covariates into a binary logistic regression. Forward logistic regression was performed to determine which preoperative factors best predicted handrail use at three months and two years after surgery. Handrail use in a control group was also evaluated at baseline and at the time of the two-year follow-up.ResultsPrior to surgery, sixty-three of the 105 subjects required a handrail. Two years after surgery, sixty of the 105 subjects required a handrail. In the control group, nineteen of the sixty-four subjects required a handrail at baseline and ten of thirty-one required a handrail at the time of the two-year follow-up. At two years, the preoperative ability to ascend and descend stairs without a handrail was the best predictor of individuals who would not require a handrail after surgery, followed by younger age and greater quadriceps strength. Collectively, these variables correctly predicted the ability of ninety of 105 persons to negotiate stairs without a handrail at two years after surgery (p < 0.001).ConclusionsYounger, stronger patients who do not use a handrail prior to unilateral total knee arthroplasty can expect the best outcomes in terms of ascending and descending stairs following surgery. This information may provide patients with more realistic expectations after surgery and allow them to make more appropriate discharge plans.

Project description:Introduction: Knee OA progression is related to medial knee contact forces, which can be altered by anatomical parameters of tibiofemoral alignment and contact point locations. There is limited and controversial literature on medial-lateral force distribution and the effect of anatomical parameters, especially in motor activities different from walking. We analyzed the effect of tibiofemoral alignment and contact point locations on knee contact forces, and the medial-lateral force distribution in knee OA subjects with varus malalignment during walking, stair ascending and stair descending. Methods: Fifty-one knee OA subjects with varus malalignment underwent weight-bearing radiographs and motion capture during walking, stair ascending and stair descending. We created a set of four musculoskeletal models per subject with increasing level of personalization, and calculated medial and lateral knee contact forces. To analyze the effect of the anatomical parameters, statistically-significant differences in knee contact forces among models were evaluated. Then, to analyze the force distribution, the medial-to-total contact force ratios were calculated from the fully-informed models. In addition, a multiple regression analysis was performed to evaluate correlations between forces and anatomical parameters. Results: The anatomical parameters significantly affected the knee contact forces. However, the contact points decreased medial forces and increased lateral forces and led to more marked variations compared to tibiofemoral alignment, which produced an opposite effect. The forces were less medially-distributed during stair negotiation, with medial-to-total ratios below 50% at force peaks. The anatomical parameters explained 30%-67% of the variability in the knee forces, where the medial contact points were the best predictors of medial contact forces. Discussion: Including personalized locations of contact points is crucial when analyzing knee contact forces in subjects with varus malalignment, and especially the medial contact points have a major effect on the forces rather than tibiofemoral alignment. Remarkably, the medial-lateral force distribution depends on the motor activity, where stair ascending and descending show increased lateral forces that lead to less medially-distributed loads compared to walking.

Project description:BackgroundFree vascularized fibula graft (FVFG) techniques have most consistently demonstrated beneficial effects in young patients diagnosed with nontraumatic osteonecrosis of the femoral head (NONFH), and the core track technique (CTT) in particular is the most commonly used technique. As an alternative to CTT, the modified light bulb technique (LBT) has been reported to have a higher success rate. However, its biomechanical outcomes are poorly understood. This study aimed to compare the biomechanical properties of modified LBT with those of CTT in treating NONFH.MethodsTwo types (C1 and C2) of NONFH finite element models were established on the basis of a healthy subject and the Japanese Investigation Committee (JIC) classification system, and the CTT and LBT procedures were simulated in each type of model. The average von Mises stresses and stiffness of the proximal femur were calculated by applying a load of 250% of the body weight on the femoral head to simulate walking conditions. In addition, two patient-specific models were built and simulated under the same boundary conditions to further validate the LBT.ResultsIn the healthy subject-derived models, both the LBT and CTT resulted in reduced stresses in the weight-bearing area, central femoral head, femoral neck, and trochanteric and subtrochanteric regions and increased structural stiffness after surgery. In the weight-bearing area, the CTT reduced the stress more than the LBT did (36.19% vs 31.45%) for type C1 NONFH and less than the LBT did (23.63% vs 26.76%) for type C2 NONFH. In the patient-specific models, the stiffness and stresses also increased and decreased, respectively, from before to after surgery, which is consistent with the results of healthy subject-derived models.ConclusionThe biomechanical effects of the LBT and CTT differ by the JIC type of NONFH. In terms of preventing the collapse of the femoral head, the LBT may be more effective for JIC type C2 NONFH and may be a suitable alternative to the CTT, while for JIC type C1 NONFH, the CTT is still a better choice. Both techniques can improve the biomechanical properties of NONFH by reducing the proximal femoral stress and increasing the structural stiffness.

Dataset Information

Finite element analysis of femoral neck strains during stair ascent and descent.

Publications

Finite element analysis of femoral neck strains during stair ascent and descent.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets