Three-Dimensional Finite Element Analysis of Prosthetic Finger Joint Implants

被引:0
作者
E.A. Biddis
E.R. Bogoch
S.A. Meguid
机构
[1] University of Toronto,Department of Mechanical and Industrial Engineering, Engineering Mechanics and Design Laboratory
[2] University of Toronto,Martin Family Centre for Arthritis Care and Research, Mobility Program, Department of Surgery, St. Michael‘s Hospital
关键词
finite element analysis; metacarpophalangeal joint; NeuFlex implant; Swanson implant; three-dimensional;
D O I
10.1007/s10999-005-3308-3
中图分类号
学科分类号
摘要
The purpose of this study was to develop high resolution three-dimensional (3D) finite element (FE) models of the Swanson® (No. 2) and NeuFlex® (No. 10) joint implants to: simulate implant function; evaluate stress distributions and bending stiffness of these implants; and assess their comparative potential for fracture and range of motion (ROM) in flexion and extension. Geometric representations of the implants accurate to within 20 μm were achieved using digital laser imaging technology. Images were transferred to ANSYS 5.7 using appropriate interfacing software and 3D FE models of the implants were constructed. Hyperelastic material properties of the silicone elastomers were derived experimentally from uniaxial tensile tests on implant sections. Both implants experienced maximum von Mises stresses at 90° of flexion and minimum stresses at the neutral position of flexion (Swanson: 0°, NeuFlex: 30°). Within the reported functional ROM (33°–73°), the NeuFlex implant exhibited lower maximum von Mises stress and bending stiffness than the Swanson. The Swanson implant, which has a straight hinge, exhibited lower peak stresses and bending stiffness than the NeuFlex for flexion less than 20°. Areas of high von Mises stress for the Swanson implant included the stem–hinge junction and the peripheral zone of the body of the hinge, corresponding to clinical reports of fractures. In the NeuFlex implant, the maximum stress occurred on the dorsal surface of the hinge. Bending stiffness of the NeuFlex implant was modelled to be substantially less than that of the Swanson throughout the functional ROM (33°–73° of flexion). The resting position of the Swanson implant is at 0° of flexion. A moment was required to extend the NeuFlex implant from 30° to 0° of flexion. These results suggest that the NeuFlex may potentially facilitate flexion of the metacarpophalangeal (MP) joint, whereas the Swanson may promote a more extended position of the joint.
引用
收藏
页码:317 / 328
页数:11
相关论文
共 87 条
  • [1] Beevers D.J.(1993)Metacarpophalangeal joint prostheses: A review of past and current designs Proceedings of the Institute of Mechanical Engineering [H] 207 195-206
  • [2] Seedhorn B.B.(1986)Silicone-rubber implant arthroplasty of metacarpophalangeal joints for rheumatoid arthritis Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery (American) 68 206-209
  • [3] Bieber E.J.(1984)Metacarpophalangeal joint implant arthroplasty with a silastic spacer Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery (American) 66 365-370
  • [4] Weiland A.J.(2002)The hand: A second face? The hand Second Face Journal of Rheumatology 29 2477-2483
  • [5] Volenec-Dowling S.(2000)Patient outcomes following Swanson silastic metacarpophalangeal joint arthroplasty in the rheumatoid hand: A systematic overview Journal of Rheumatology 27 1395-1402
  • [6] Blair W.F.(2003)NeuFlex Silastic implant in metacarpophalangeal joint arthroplasty Orthopade 32 789-793
  • [7] Shurr D.G.(1975)Complications of silicone implant surgery in the metacarpophalangeal joint Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery (American) 57 991-994
  • [8] Buckwalter J.A.(1984)Metacarpophalangeal arthroplasty eleven year follow-up study Journal of Hand Surgery (British) 9 300-302
  • [9] Bogoch E.R.(2003)Metacarpophalangeal joint arthroplasty in rheumatoid arthritis. A long-term assessment Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery (American) 85 1869-1878
  • [10] Judd M.G.(1975)Metacarpophalangeal joint implants. I. Roentgenographic study of the silastic finger joint implant, swanson design Scandinavian Journal of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery 9 147-157