340 likes | 434 Views
Bone Ingrowth. in a shoulder prosthesis E.M.van Aken, Applied Mathematics. Outline. Introduction to the problem Models: Model due to Bailon-Plaza: Fracture healing Model due to Prendergast: Prosthesis Numerical method: Finite Element Method Results
E N D
Bone Ingrowth in a shoulder prosthesis E.M.van Aken, Applied Mathematics
Outline • Introduction to the problem • Models: • Model due to Bailon-Plaza: Fracture healing • Model due to Prendergast: Prosthesis • Numerical method: Finite Element Method • Results • Model I: model due to Bailon-Plaza -> tissue differentiation, fracture healing • Model II: model due to Prendergast -> tissue differentiation, glenoid • Model II: tissue differentiation + poro elastic, glenoid • Recommendations
Introduction • Osteoarthritis, osteoporosis dysfunctional shoulder • Possible solution: • Humeral head replacement (HHR) • Total shoulder arthroplasty(TSA): HHR + glenoid replacement
Introduction • Need for glenoid revision after TSA is less common than the need for glenoid resurfacing after an unsuccesful HHR • TSA: 6% failure glenoid component, 2% failure on humeral side
Model • Cell differentiation:
Models • Two models: • Model I: Bailon-Plaza: • Tissue differentiation: incl. growth factors • Model II: Prendergast: • Tissue differentiation • Mechanical stimulus
Model I • Geometry of the fracture
Model I • Cell concentrations:
Model I • Matrix densities: • Growth factors:
Model I • Boundary and initial conditions:
Finite Element Method • Divide domain in elements • Multiply equation by test function • Define basis function and set • Integrate over domain
Numerical methods • Finite Element Method: • Triangular elements • Linear basis functions
Results model I After 2.4 days: After 4 days:
Results model I After 8 days: After 20 days:
Model II • Geometry of the bone-implant interface
Model II • Equations cell concentrations:
Model II • Matrix densities:
Model II • Boundary and initial conditions:
Model II Proliferation and differentiation rates depend on stimulus S, which follows from the mechanical part of the model.
Results Bone density after 80 days, stimulus=1
Model II Poro-elastic model • Equilibrium eqn: • Constitutive eqn: • Compatibility cond: • Darcy’s law: • Continuity eqn:
Model II • Incompressible, viscous fluid: • Slightly compressible, viscous fluid:
Model II Incompressible: Problem if Solution approximates Finite Element Method leads to inconsistent or singular matrix
Model II Solution: 1. Quadratic elements to approximate displacements 2. Stabilization term
Model II • u and v determine the shear strain γ • p and Darcy’s law determine relative fluid velocity
Model II Boundary conditions
Results Model II Arm abduction 30 ° Arm abduction 90 °
Results Model II 30 ° arm abduction, during 200 days
Results Model II Simulation of 200 days: first 100 days: every 3rd day arm abd. 90°, rest of the time 30 °. 100 days200 days
Recommendations • Add growth factors to model Prendergast • More accurate simulation mech. part: • Timescale difference between bio/mech parts • Use the eqn for incompressibility (and stabilization term) • Extend to 3D (FEM)