Experimental study on mechanical properties of the new personalized radial head prostheses based on computer aided design

doi:10.13418/j.issn.1001-165x.2025.4.06

PDF(1279 KB)

Chinese Journal of Clinical Anatomy ›› 2025, Vol. 43 ›› Issue (4) : 396-403. DOI: 10.13418/j.issn.1001-165x.2025.4.06

Experimental study on mechanical properties of the new personalized radial head prostheses based on computer aided design

Yang Guang, Li Shangzhe, Chen Renjie, Zhang Hailong, Lu Yi*

Author information +

History +

Abstract

Objective To explore the differences of mechanical properties and the lateral stability among normal elbow joint, two new personalized radial head prostheses and two imported prostheses. Methods Three-dimensional CT and nuclear magnetic resonance images of elbow joints of 6 healthy subjects were collected. The finite element analysis was carried out on 12 positions of elbow joints, involving neutral position, pronation 50o, supination 50o, elbow flexion 0o, 30o, 90o , and 120o and others. The contact area and the lateral stress, among normal joint, the integrated prosthesis (type 1), the modular prosthesis (type 2), the Acumed prosthesis (type 3) and the Wright prosthesis (type 4) was investigated. explored. Stress values of elbow joint specimens from 6 fresh frozen cadavers was analyzed, and compared with that of four kinds of prostheses. Results There was no significant difference for stress values between type 1 or type 2 prostheses and normal joints at pronation and supination 50o under varus or eversion stress (P>0.05). For type 3 prosthesis, the values were significantly smaller than that of normal joints at the 10 position under varus stress, or eversion stress (P<0.05). For type 4 prosthesis, all values were markedly smaller than that of normal joints at all postures (P<0.05). In terms of finite element analysis, under the above 12 positions, there was no significant difference for joint contact area, peak stress of humeral and radial articular surfaces among type 1 or 2 prostheses and normal joints. For type 3 prosthesis, the contact area was significantly smaller than that of normal joint, at the 10 position. The humeral peak stress was significantly greater than that of normal joints at the 4 position. The radial stress was significantly greater than that of normal joints at the 2 position. For type 4 prosthesis, the contact area was significantly smaller than that of normal joints at the 7 position. The humeral peak stress was significantly greater than that of the normal joint at the 6 position. The radial stress was significantly greater than that of normal joints at the 5 position. Conclusions Comparing with the imported prosthesis currently used in clinic, the 3D printed personalized radial head prostheses are closer to the normal radial head in biomechanical performance, which makes a preliminary clues for the further clinical application of these new prostheses.

Key words

Radial head; / / Prostheses; / / Mechanical test; / / Finite element analysis

Cite this article

EndNote

Ris (Procite)

Bibtex

Download Citations

Yang Guang, Li Shangzhe, Chen Renjie, Zhang Hailong, Lu Yi. Experimental study on mechanical properties of the new personalized radial head prostheses based on computer aided design[J]. Chinese Journal of Clinical Anatomy. 2025, 43(4): 396-403 https://doi.org/10.13418/j.issn.1001-165x.2025.4.06

References

[1] Beingessner DM, Dunning CE, Gordon KD, et al. The effect of radial head excision and arthroplasty on elbow kinematics and stability [J]. J Bone Joint Surg Am, 2004, 86(8): 1730-1739. DOI: 10.2106/00004623-200408000-00018.
[2] Li XY, Wang YL, Yang S, et al. Radial head arthroplasty vs. open reduction and internal fixation for the treatment of terrible triad injury of the elbow: a systematic review and meta-analysis update [J]. Exp Ther Med, 2022, 24(3): 592. DOI: 10.3892/etm.2022.11529.
[3] Lapner M, King GJ. Radial head fractures [J]. J Bone Joint Surg Am, 2013, 95(12):1136-1143.
[4] Mason ML. Some observations on fractures of the head of the radius with a review of one hundred cases[J]. Br J Surg, 1954, 42(172):123-32. DOI: 10.1002/bjs.18004217203.
[5] Morrey BF. Radial head fracture [M]// The elbow and its disorders. 3rd ed. Philadelphia: WB Saunders, 2000:341-364.
[6] Sershon RA, Luchetti TJ, Wysocki RW,et al. Radial head replacement with a bipolar system: an average 10-year follow-up [J]. J Shoulder Elbow Surg, 2018, 27(2):e38-e44. DOI:10.1016/j.jse.2017.09.015.
[7] Li N, Chen S. Open reduction and internal-fixation versus radial head replacement in treatment of Mason type III radial head fractures [J]. Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol, 2014, 24(6):851-855. DOI:10.1007/s00590-013-1367-y.
[8] Ricón FJ, Sánchez P, Guerado E, et al. Result of a pyrocarbon prosthesis after comminuted and unreconstructable radial head fractures [J]. J Shoulder Elbow Surg,2012,21(1):82-91. DOI:10.1016/j.jse. 2011. 01. 032.
[9] Rotini R, Marinelli A, Cavaciocchi M, et al. Radial head replacement with unipolar and bipolar SBi system: a clinical and radiographic analysis after a 2-year mean follow-up [J]. Musculoskelet Surg, 2012, 96(Suppl 1):S69-S79. DOI:10.1007/s12306-012-0198-z.
[10]Sarris IK, Kyrkos MJ, Kapetanos GA, et al. Radial head replacement with the MoPyC pyrocarbon prosthesis [J]. J Shoulder Elbow Surg, 2012, 21(9):1222-1228. DOI:10.1016/j.jse.2011.12.004.
[11]Burkhart KJ, Mattyasovszky SG, Runkel M, et al. Mid- to long-term results after bipolar radial head arthroplasty [J]. J Shoulder Elbow Surg, 2010, 19(7): 965-972. DOI:10.1016/j.jse.2010.05.022.
[12]Gauci MO, Winter M, Allieu Y, et al. Clinical and radiologic outcomes of pyrocarbon radial head prosthesis: midterm results [J]. J Shoulder Elbow Surg, 2016, 25(1): 98-104. DOI:10.1016/j.jse.2015.08.033.
[13]Kodde IF, Heijink A, Eygendaal D, et al. Press-fit bipolar radial head arthroplasty, midterm results [J]. J Shoulder Elbow Surg, 2016, 25(8):1235-1242. DOI:10.1016/j.jse.2016.02.007.
[14]Heijink A, Kodde IF, Mulder PGH, et al. Radial Head Arthroplasty: A Systematic Review [J]. JBJS Rev, 2016, 4(10):e3. DOI:10.2106/JBJS.RVW.15.00095.
[15]Kodde IF, van Rijn J, Eygendaal D, et al. Surgical treatment of post-traumatic elbow stiffness: a systematic review [J]. J Shoulder Elbow Surg, 2013, 22(4): 574-580. DOI:10.1016/j.jse.2012.11.010.
[16]van Riet RP, Sanchez-Sotelo J, Morrey BF. Failure of metal radial head replacement [J]. J Bone Joint Surg Br, 2010, 92(5):661-667. DOI:10.1302/0301-620X.92B5.23067.
[17]Duckworth AD, Wickramasinghe NR, McQueen MM, et al. Radial head replacement for acute complex fractures: what are the rate and risks factors for revision or removal [J]? Clin Orthop Relat Res, 2014,472(7):2136-2143. DOI:10.1007/s11999-014-3516-y.
[18]Bachman DR, Thaveepunsan S, O'Driscoll SW, et al. The effect of prosthetic radial head geometry on the distribution and magnitude of radiocapitellar joint contact pressures [J]. J Hand Surg Am, 2015, 40(2):281-288. DOI:10.1016/j.jhsa.2014.11.005.
[19]Lalone EA, Shannon HL, Johnson JA, et al. Effect of Radial Head Implant Shape on Radiocapitellar Joint Congruency [J]. J Hand Surg Am, 2017, 42(6): 476.e1-476.e11. DOI:10.1016/j.jhsa.2017.03.009.
[20]Shannon HL, Deluce SR, Johnson JA, et al. Effect of radial head implant shape on joint contact area and location during static loading [J]. J Hand Surg Am, 2015, 40(4):716-722.DOI:10.1016/j.jhsa. 2014.12.017.
[21]Levy JC, Formaini NT, Kurowicki J. Outcomes and radiographic findings of anatomic press-fit radial head arthroplasty [J]. J Shoulder Elbow Surg, 2016, 25(5): 802-809. DOI:10.1016/j.jse.2015.11.014.
[22]Kataoka T, Moritomo H, Sugamoto K, et al. Three-dimensional suitability assessment of three types of osteochondral autograft for ulnar coronoid process reconstruction [J]. J Shoulder Elbow Surg, 2014, 23(2):143-150. DOI:10.1016/j.jse.2013.10.004.
[23]Bellato E, O'Driscoll SW. Prosthetic replacement for coronoid deficiency: report of three cases [J]. J Shoulder Elbow Surg, 2017, 26(3): 382-388. DOI:10.1016/j.jse.2016.09.039.
[24]Luenam S, Vongvanichvathana A, Kosiyatrakul A, et al. Matching precision of the reverse contralateral radial head in generating of the individualized prosthesis from the surface registration in tuberosity-neck and in tuberosity-diaphysis [J]. J Orthop Surg (Hong Kong), 2019, 27(1): 2309499018821774. DOI:10.1177/2309499018821774.
[25]Szmit J, King GJW, Langohr GDG, et al. The effect of stem fit on the radiocapitellar contact mechanics of a metallic axisymmetric radial head hemiarthroplasty: is loose fit better than rigidly fixed? [J]. J Shoulder Elbow Surg, 2019, 28(12):2394-2399. DOI:10.1016/j.jse.2019.05.019.
[26]Kahmann SL, Sas A, Wegmann K, et al. A combined experimental and finite element analysis of the human elbow under loads of daily living [J].J Biomech,2023,158:111766. DOI:10.1016/j.jbiomech. 2023. 111766.
[27]Strelzow JA, Athwal GS, MacDermid JC, et al. Effect of Concomitant Elbow Injuries on the Outcomes of Radial Head Arthroplasty: A Cohort Comparison [J]. J Orthop Trauma, 2017, 31(10):e327-e333. DOI:10.1097/BOT.0000000000000921.
[28]Yang G, Li S, Lu Y, et al. A systematic review and meta-analysis on different stem fixation methods of radial head prostheses during long-term follow-up [J]. Front Bioeng Biotechnol, 2022,10:1041531. DOI:10.3389/fbioe.2022.1041531.
[29]Burkhart KJ, Mattyasovszky SG, Runkel M, et al. Mid- to long-term results after bipolar radial head arthroplasty [J]. J Shoulder Elbow Surg, 2010, 19(7): 965-972. DOI:10.1016/j.jse.2010.05.022.
[30]Safali S, Eravsar E, Özdemir A, et al. Treatment of comminuted radial head fractures with personalized radial head prosthesis produced with 3-dimensional printing technology [J]. J Shoulder Elbow Surg, 2023, 32(3): 463-474. DOI:10.1016/j.jse.2022.10.010.
[31]Van Glabbeek F, Van Riet RP, Baumfeld JA, et al. Detrimental effects of overstuffing or understuffing with a radial head replacement in the medial collateral-ligament deficient elbow [J]. J Bone Joint Surg Am, 2004, 86(12): 2629-2635. DOI:10.2106/00004623-200412000-00007.
[32]Captier G, Canovas F, Bonnel F, et al. Biometry of the radial head: biomechanical implications in pronation and supination [J]. Surg Radiol Anat, 2002, 24(5): 295-301. DOI:10.1007/s00276-002-0059-9.
[33]Liew VS, Cooper IC, King GJ, et al. The effect of metallic radial head arthroplasty on radiocapitellar joint contact area [J]. Clin Biomech (Bristol), 2003,18(2): 115-118. DOI:10.1016/s0268-0033(02)00172-9.