Severity: Warning
Message: file_get_contents(https://...@gmail.com&api_key=61f08fa0b96a73de8c900d749fcb997acc09&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests
Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line Number: 197
Backtrace:
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 197
Function: file_get_contents
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 271
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3165
Function: getPubMedXML
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 597
Function: pubMedSearch_Global
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 511
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword
File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 317
Function: require_once
98%
921
2 minutes
20
We aimed to evaluate the biomechanical contact characteristics of rotating hinge knee (RHK) prostheses with different motion axial systems. We performed finite element (FE) analyses to investigate and compare the peak contact stress and contact location on tibial insert and bushing during a gait cycle. The biaxial (BA) system and spherical center axial (SA) system RHK prostheses were included in this study. The comparisons between experimental tests and FE analyses were performed to verify the validation of FE models. Decreased ISO loadings were then applied to the validated FE models to investigate the peak contact stress and contact location on tibial insert and bushing. The contact areas obtained from experimental tests and FE analyses were in a good agreement. The peak contact stresses on tibial insert and bushing of BA prosthesis were higher than those of SA prosthesis. The contact locations on the superior surface of tibial insert in SA and BA prostheses were at the middle-posterior and posterior side, while those on the rotating axial surface were at the medial and lateral sides, respectively. This study indicate that the tibial insert and bushing of an SA prosthesis have lower peak contact stresses and better contact locations than those of a BA prosthesis during a gait cycle, which may decrease the risk of long-term complications of RHK prostheses. Future studies should be performed to confirm the relationship between the contact characteristics and wear in RHK prostheses.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/aor.13872 | DOI Listing |