Cargando…

Compression or tension? The stress distribution in the proximal femur

BACKGROUND: Questions regarding the distribution of stress in the proximal human femur have never been adequately resolved. Traditionally, by considering the femur in isolation, it has been believed that the effect of body weight on the projecting neck and head places the superior aspect of the neck...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Rudman, KE, Aspden, RM, Meakin, JR
Formato: Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2006
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1397837/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16504005
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1475-925X-5-12
_version_ 1782126972529278976
author Rudman, KE
Aspden, RM
Meakin, JR
author_facet Rudman, KE
Aspden, RM
Meakin, JR
author_sort Rudman, KE
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Questions regarding the distribution of stress in the proximal human femur have never been adequately resolved. Traditionally, by considering the femur in isolation, it has been believed that the effect of body weight on the projecting neck and head places the superior aspect of the neck in tension. A minority view has proposed that this region is in compression because of muscular forces pulling the femur into the pelvis. Little has been done to study stress distributions in the proximal femur. We hypothesise that under physiological loading the majority of the proximal femur is in compression and that the internal trabecular structure functions as an arch, transferring compressive stresses to the femoral shaft. METHODS: To demonstrate the principle, we have developed a 2D finite element model of the femur in which body weight, a representation of the pelvis, and ligamentous forces were included. The regions of higher trabecular bone density in the proximal femur (the principal trabecular systems) were assigned a higher modulus than the surrounding trabecular bone. Two-legged and one-legged stances, the latter including an abductor force, were investigated. RESULTS: The inclusion of ligamentous forces in two-legged stance generated compressive stresses in the proximal femur. The increased modulus in areas of greater structural density focuses the stresses through the arch-like internal structure. Including an abductor muscle force in simulated one-legged stance also produced compression, but with a different distribution. CONCLUSION: This 2D model shows, in principle, that including ligamentous and muscular forces has the effect of generating compressive stresses across most of the proximal femur. The arch-like trabecular structure transmits the compressive loads to the shaft. The greater strength of bone in compression than in tension is then used to advantage. These results support the hypothesis presented. If correct, a better understanding of the stress distribution in the proximal femur may lead to improvements in prosthetic devices and an appreciation of the effects of various surgical procedures affecting load transmission across the hip.
format Text
id pubmed-1397837
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2006
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-13978372006-03-11 Compression or tension? The stress distribution in the proximal femur Rudman, KE Aspden, RM Meakin, JR Biomed Eng Online Research BACKGROUND: Questions regarding the distribution of stress in the proximal human femur have never been adequately resolved. Traditionally, by considering the femur in isolation, it has been believed that the effect of body weight on the projecting neck and head places the superior aspect of the neck in tension. A minority view has proposed that this region is in compression because of muscular forces pulling the femur into the pelvis. Little has been done to study stress distributions in the proximal femur. We hypothesise that under physiological loading the majority of the proximal femur is in compression and that the internal trabecular structure functions as an arch, transferring compressive stresses to the femoral shaft. METHODS: To demonstrate the principle, we have developed a 2D finite element model of the femur in which body weight, a representation of the pelvis, and ligamentous forces were included. The regions of higher trabecular bone density in the proximal femur (the principal trabecular systems) were assigned a higher modulus than the surrounding trabecular bone. Two-legged and one-legged stances, the latter including an abductor force, were investigated. RESULTS: The inclusion of ligamentous forces in two-legged stance generated compressive stresses in the proximal femur. The increased modulus in areas of greater structural density focuses the stresses through the arch-like internal structure. Including an abductor muscle force in simulated one-legged stance also produced compression, but with a different distribution. CONCLUSION: This 2D model shows, in principle, that including ligamentous and muscular forces has the effect of generating compressive stresses across most of the proximal femur. The arch-like trabecular structure transmits the compressive loads to the shaft. The greater strength of bone in compression than in tension is then used to advantage. These results support the hypothesis presented. If correct, a better understanding of the stress distribution in the proximal femur may lead to improvements in prosthetic devices and an appreciation of the effects of various surgical procedures affecting load transmission across the hip. BioMed Central 2006-02-20 /pmc/articles/PMC1397837/ /pubmed/16504005 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1475-925X-5-12 Text en Copyright © 2006 Rudman et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0 This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License ( (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0) ), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Research
Rudman, KE
Aspden, RM
Meakin, JR
Compression or tension? The stress distribution in the proximal femur
title Compression or tension? The stress distribution in the proximal femur
title_full Compression or tension? The stress distribution in the proximal femur
title_fullStr Compression or tension? The stress distribution in the proximal femur
title_full_unstemmed Compression or tension? The stress distribution in the proximal femur
title_short Compression or tension? The stress distribution in the proximal femur
title_sort compression or tension? the stress distribution in the proximal femur
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1397837/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16504005
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1475-925X-5-12
work_keys_str_mv AT rudmanke compressionortensionthestressdistributionintheproximalfemur
AT aspdenrm compressionortensionthestressdistributionintheproximalfemur
AT meakinjr compressionortensionthestressdistributionintheproximalfemur