不同内植物修复单侧不稳定骨盆后环损伤的有限元及生物力学分析

Finite element and biomechanical analysis of different implants in repair for unilateral unstable pelvic posterior ring injury

背景:骨盆稳定性主要由骨盆后环决定及骶髂关节决定,车祸等高能量冲击带来的骨盆后环损伤及骶髂关节脱位病例逐年递增。手术治疗是最优方法,临床中存在多种内植物修复方式,但哪种治疗方式的生物力学性能最优仍有一定争议。目的:对比前路双钢板、后路桥接钢板、拉力钉3种内植物修复单侧不稳定骨盆后环损伤的生物力学性能,为其临床治疗及骨盆新型拉力钉研发提供参考。方法:①有限元仿真:利用Mimics、Wrap和SolidWorks分别建立正常骨盆、单侧后环损伤骨盆及其前路双钢板、后路桥接钢板、拉力钉修复模型,利用Ansys分析模型的应力和变形情况;②生物力学实验:用15个完整骨盆标本随机分为5组,分别为正常骨盆、单侧后环损伤骨盆及其前路双钢板、后路桥接钢板、拉力钉修复组,并用Instron E10000力学试验机进行力学测试。结果与结论:①仿真分析结果显示,正常骨盆模型骶骨平均位移为0.174 mm,骶髂骨最大应力为10.51 MPa,应力分布均匀;单侧不稳定损伤骨盆模型骶骨平均位移最大,为0.267 mm,模型应力集中明显;3种修复模型骶骨平均位移都接近正常骨盆模型,拉力钉修复模型骶髂骨应力分布均匀;②力学实验结果显示,正常骨盆模型整体刚度为(226.38±4.18)N/mm,单侧不稳定损伤骨盆模型整体刚度最小为(130.02±2.19)N/mm,3种修复方式整体刚度和正常骨盆偏差都在±10%以内,修复效果明显;③仿真结果和力学实验结果相符;④从生物力学角度分析,拉力钉修复模型的生物力学状态与正常骨盆最接近,该种方式最佳;前路双钢板修复刚度过大,应力遮挡效果更显著;后路桥接钢板修复不能解决正常侧软组织的代偿效果,存在缺陷;该研究可为临床手术提供优选依据;⑤骨盆新型拉力钉应从拉力钉的角度进行改良,保留拉力钉良好的生物力学性能,同时附加其他优势性能,例如可用于骨质疏松骨盆等。

BACKGROUND:The stability of the pelvis is mainly determined by the posterior pelvic ring and the sacroiliac joint.The posterior pelvic ring injury and the dislocation of the sacroiliac joint caused by high energy impacts such as car accidents increase year by year.Surgical treatment is the best method,and there are many kinds of endophytorepair methods in clinical practice,but which treatment method has the best biomechanical properties is still controversial.OBJECTIVE:To compare the biomechanical properties of three kinds of internal implants:anterior double plates,posterior bridging plate and tension nail in the repair of unilateral unstable pelvic posterior ring injury,to provide a reference for the clinical treatment and development of a new pelvic tension screw.METHODS:(1)Finite element simulation:Mimics,Wrap and SolidWorks were used to establish normal pelvic model,unilateral injured pelvis model,and three kinds of internal implant repaired models(anterior double plates,posterior bridging plate and tension nail).Ansys was used to analyze the stress and deformation of the models.(2)Biomechanical test:A total of 15 intact pelvic specimens were randomly grouped into five groups,normal pelvic model,unilateral injured pelvis model,anterior double plates,posterior bridging plate and tension nail groups.The mechanical test was performed using an Instron E10000 testing machine.RESULTS AND CONCLUSION:(1)Simulation:In the normal pelvic model,the average displacement of the sacrum was 0.174 mm,and the maximum stress of the sacral iliac bone was 10.51 MPa,and the stress distribution was uniform.The mean sacral displacement of the unilateral injured pelvis model was 0.267 mm,and the stress concentration of the model was obvious.The mean displacement of the sacrum in the three repaired models was close to that in the normal pelvic model,and the stress distribution of the sacral iliac bone in the tension nail repaired model was uniform.(2)Mechanical test:The stiffness of the normal pelvic model was(226.38±4.18)N/mm,and that of the unilateral unstable pelvic model was the smallest(130.02±2.19)N/mm.The deviation of the normal pelvic model stiffness and the three repaired models’stiffness were all within(±10%),and the repair effect was obvious.(3)The simulation results were in agreement with the experimental results.(4)The biomechanics of the tension nail repaired model was the most similar to that of the normal pelvis,and this method was the best.The repairing stiffness of the anterior double plate was too large,and the stress shielding effect was more significant.The posterior bridging plate repair could not solve the compensatory effect of the normal side soft tissue and had defects.This study provides an optimal basis for clinical surgery.(5)The new type of pelvic tension nail should be improved from the point of view of the tension nail to retain the good biomechanical properties of the tension nail,while adding other advantages,such as being used for the osteoporotic pelvis.