Biomechanical supporting effect of tantalum rods for the femoral head with various sized lesions: a finite-element analysis

Background Features of necrotic lesions and various interventions could affect the biomechanics of the femoral head. A three-dimensional finite-element analysis was designed to demonstrate necrotic femoral head stress changes with various sizes of necrotic lesions, and evaluate the effect of tantalum rods on preventing femoral head cracking. Methods Femoral computed tomography scans were used to build a normal three-dimensional finite-element femoral head model in a computer. Based on the normal model, necrotic models of different lesion diameters (15 mm, 20 mm and 30 mm) were created, as were the repaired models with tantalum rods for each diameter. After a series of meshing and force loading, the von Mises stress distributions, simulating single-legged stance, and stresses on specific points under loaded conditions were determined for each model. Results Deep exploration into the burdened area of the femoral head indicated that higher stresses to the femoral head were observed with a larger necrotic lesion; the largest stress concentration, 91.3 MPa, was found on the femoral head with a lesion diameter of 30 mm. By contrast, topical stress on the surface of the necrotic regions was lowered following implantation of a tantalum rod, and the changes in stress were significant in models with lesions of 15 mm and 30 mm in diameter, with the best biomechanical benefit from the tantalum rod found with a lesion diameter of 15 mm. Conclusions Femoral heads with larger necrotic lesions usually have a higher stress concentration and a higher risk of collapse. Various sized lesions on the femoral head can benefit from the mechanical support offered by the implantation of a tantalum rod; however, femoral heads with smaller sized lesions may benefit more. A thorough evaluation of the lesion size should be conducted prior to the use of tantalum rod implants in the treatment of femoral head necrosis. Chin Med J 2012;125(22):4061-4065