BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders (Jul 2024)

Biomechanical analysis of load distribution in porcine hip joints at different acetabular coverages

  • Tetsuya Tachibana,
  • Hiroki Katagiri,
  • Junpei Matsuda,
  • Nobutake Ozeki,
  • Toshifumi Watanabe,
  • Ichiro Sekiya,
  • Tetsuya Jinno

DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12891-024-07701-w
Journal volume & issue
Vol. 25, no. 1
pp. 1 – 7

Abstract

Read online

Abstract Background Developmental dysplasia of the hip causes secondary osteoarthritis. Finite element analysis suggests high hip joint contact pressure in patients with hip dysplasia and a reduction in contact pressure after periacetabular osteotomy. However, few biomechanical studies have examined the load distribution in the hip joint. This study aimed to investigate the biomechanical properties of load distribution in porcine hip joints at different acetabular coverages. Methods Six porcine hip joints were analyzed using three models: 1) neutral coverage, 2) 15° under-coverage (defined as dysplasia model), and 3) 15° over-coverage created by varying the acetabular coverage. The load distribution was assessed using a pressure-mapping sensor system after applying a loading force of 100 N to the hip joint. Results In the dysplasia model, the load was concentrated at the acetabular rim; in the neutral and over-coverage models, it was dispersed. The average contact pressure was significantly higher in the dysplasia model than in the neutral coverage model ([0.42 vs. 0.3 MPa]; p = 0.004). The contact area was significantly smaller in the dysplasia model than in the neutral coverage model ([250.7 vs. 345.0 mm2]; p = 0.004). No significant differences were observed in contact pressure or area between the neutral and over-coverage models. Conclusions Insufficient acetabular coverage in the dysplasia model demonstrated higher contact pressure and smaller contact area than the neutral model. Conversely, the contact pressure and area in the over-coverage model did not differ significantly from those in the normal model. Therefore, surgeons should note that acetabular coverage overcorrection has limited effect; normalization is crucial during periacetabular osteotomy.

Keywords