There is significant interest in the stress—strain state in the proximal femoral metaphysis, because of its relevance for hip fractures and prosthetic replacements. The scope of this work was to provide a better understanding of the strain distribution, and of its correlation with the different directions of loading, and with bone quality. A total of 12 pairs of human femurs were instrumented with strain gauges. Six loading configurations were designed to cover the range of directions spanned by the hip joint force. Inter-specimen variability was reduced if paired specimens were considered. The principal strain magnitude varied greatly between loading configurations. This suggests that different loading configurations need to be simulated in vitro. The strain magnitude varied between locations but, on average, was compatible with the strain values measured in vivo. The strain magnitudes and the direction of principal tensile strain in the head and neck were compatible with the spontaneous fractures of the proximal femur reported in some subjects. The principal tensile strain was significantly larger where the cortical bone was thinner; the compressive strain was larger where the cortical bone was thicker. The direction of the principal strain varied significantly between measurement locations but varied little between loading configurations. This suggests that the anatomy and the distribution of anisotropic material properties enable the proximal femur to respond adequately to the changing direction of daily loading.
McMinnD.DanielJ.‘History and modern concepts in surface replacement.’Proc. IMechE, Part H: J. Engineering in Medicine220 (2) (2006): 239–251
2.
GrigorisP.RobertsP.PanousisK.JinZ.‘Hip resurfacing arthroplasty: The evolution of contemporary designs.’Proc. IMechE, Part H: J. Engineering in Medicine220 (2) (2006): 95–105
3.
AmstutzH. C.CampbellP. A.Le DuffM. J.‘Fracture of the neck of the femur after surface arthroplasty of the hip.’J. Bone Jt Surg. Am.86 (2004): 1874–1877
4.
GrissoJ. A.KelseyJ. L.StromB. L.ChiuG. Y.MaislinG.O'BrienL. A.HoffmanS.KaplanF.‘Risk factors for falls as a cause of hip fracture in women. The Northeast Hip Fracture Study Group.’N. Engl. J. Medicine324 (19) (1991): 1326–1331
5.
RockwoodC. A. J.GreenD. P.BucholzR. W.Rockwood and Green's fractures in adults (J. B. Lippincott1991)
6.
YangK.-H.ShenK. L.DemetropoulosC. K.KingA. I.KolodziejP.LevineR. S.FitzgeraldR. H. J.‘The relationship between loading conditions and fracture patterns of the proximal femur.’Trans. ASME, J. Biomech. Engng118 (4) (1996): 575–578
7.
CristofoliniL.JuszczykM.MartelliS.TaddeiF.VicecontiM.‘In vitro replication of spontaneous fractures of the proximal human femur.’J. Biomechanics40 (13) (2007): 2837–2845
8.
FennerJ. W.BrookB.ClapworthyG.CoveneyP. V.FeipelV.GregersenH.HoseD. R.KohlP.LawfordP.McCormackK. M.PinneyD.ThomasS. R.Van Sint JanS.WatersS.VicecontiM.‘The EuroPhysiome, STEP and a roadmap for the virtual physiological human.’Phil. Trans., Sec. A366 (1878) (2008): 2979–2999
9.
VicecontiM.TaddeiF.Van Sint JanS.LeardiniA.CristofoliniL.SteaS.BaruffaldiF.BaleaniM.‘Multiscale modelling of the skeleton for the prediction of the risk of fracture.’Clin. Biomechanics (Bristol, Avon)23 (7) (2008): 845–852
10.
CristofoliniL.TaddeiF.BaleaniM.BaruffaldiF.SteaS.VicecontiM.‘Multiscale investigation of the functional properties of the human femur.’Phil. Trans. Sec. A366 (1879) (2008): 3319–3341
11.
FungY. C.‘Bone and cartilage.’ In Biomechanics - mechanical properties of living tissues1980, pp. 383–415 (Springer Verlag, New York).
12.
RoeslerH.‘The history of some fundamental concepts in bone biomechanics.’J. Biomechanics20 (1987): 1025–1034
13.
FabeckL.TolleyM.RoozeM.BurnyF.‘Theoretical study of the decrease in the femoral neck anteversion during growth.’Cells Tissues Organs171 (4) (2002): 269–275
14.
CristofoliniL.‘A critical analysis of stress shielding evaluation of hip prostheses.’Crit. Rev. Biomed. Engng25 (4–5) (1997): 409–483
15.
LochmüllerE.-M.GrollO.KuhnV.EcksteinF.‘Mechanical strength of the proximal femur as predicted from geometric and densitometric bone properties at the lower limb versus the distal radius.’Bone30 (1) (2002): 207–216
16.
CrickD.WagnerJ.BourgoisR.DehuP.‘Comportement mécanique de l'épiphyse supérieure de fémur resurfacé et incidence des variations anatomiques et des différentes types de cupules.’Acta Orthopaedica Belgica51 (1985): 168–178
17.
FieldR. E.RushtonN.‘Proximal femoral surface strain gauge analysis of a new epiphyseal prosthesis.’J. Biomed. Engng11 (1989): 123–129
18.
CarterD. R.SpenglerD. M.‘Mechanical properties and composition of cortical bone.’Clin. Orthop. Related Res.135 (1978): 192–217
19.
LanyonI. E.‘Bone remodelling, mechanical stress, and osteoporosis.’ In Osteoporosis (Ed. DeLucaH. F.), 1980, pp. 129–138 (University Park PressBaltimore, Maryland).
20.
HuiskesR.WeinansH.GrootenboerH. J.DalstraM.FudalaB.SlooffT. J.‘Adaptive bone-remodeling theory applied to prosthetic-design analysis.’J. Biomechanics20 (11–12) (1987): 1135–1150
21.
RuffC. B.HayesW. C.‘Cross-sectional geometry of pecos pueblo femora and tibiae — a biomechanical investigation: I. Method and general patterns of variation.’Am. J. Phys. Anthropology60 (1983): 359–381
22.
CristofoliniL.VicecontiM.‘Towards the standardization of in vitro load transfer investigations of hip prostheses.’J. Strain Analysis34 (1) (1999): 1–15
23.
‘US Department of Health and Human Services, Consensus statement on osteoporosis prevention, diagnosis, and therapy.’ NIH Consensus Statement Online17 (1) (2000): 1–36, 2000.
24.
‘Assessment of fracture risk and its application to screening for postmenopausal osteoporosis.’ Report of a WHO study group. WHO Technical Report 843, World Health Organization, Geneva, Switzerland1994, pp. 1–130.
25.
CristofoliniL.JuszczykM.PalliniF.MartelliS.TaddeiF.VicecontiM.‘Biomechanical testing of the proximal femoral epiphysis: intact and implanted condition.’ In Proceedings of the Eighth Biennial Conference on Engineering systems design and analysis (ASME-ESDA 2006), Turin, Italy 2006 (ASME International, New York).
26.
VicecontiM.ToniA.GiuntiA.‘Strain gauge analysis of hard tissues: Factors influencing measurements.’ In Experimental mechanics. Technology transfer between high tech engineering and biomechanics (Ed. LittleE. G.), 1992, pp. 177–184 (Elsevier, Amsterdam).
27.
DallyJ. W.RileyW. F.Experimental stress analysis (College House Enterprises2005)
28.
AjovalasitA.ZuccarelloB.‘Local reinforcement effect of a strain gauge installation on low modulus materials.’J. Strain Analysis40 (7) (2005): 643–654
29.
PerryC. C.‘Strain-gage reinforcement effects on low-modulus materials.’Expl Tech.9 (1985): 25–27
30.
LittleE. G.TocherD.O'DonnelP.‘Strain gauge reinforcement of plastics.’Strain26 (1990): 91–98
31.
BeattyM. F.ChewningS. W.‘Numerical analysis of the reinforcement effect of a strain gage applied to a soft material.’Int. J. Engng Sci.17 (1979): 907–915
32.
CurreyJ. ‘Cortical bone.’ In Handbook of biomaterial properties (Eds BlackJ.HastingsG.), 1998, pp. 3–14 (Chapman & Hall, London).
33.
CristofoliniL.VicecontiM.ToniA.GiuntiA.‘Influence of thigh muscles on the axial strains in a proximal femur during early stance in gait.’J. Biomechanics28 (5) (1995): 617–624
34.
KeyakJ. H.KanekoT. S.TehranzadehJ.SkinnerH. B.‘Predicting proximal femoral strength using structural engineering models.’Clin. Orthop. Related Res.437 (2005): 219–228
35.
CodyD. D.GrossG. J.HouF. J.SpencerH. J.GoldsteinS. A.FyhrieD. P.‘Femoral strength is better predicted by finite element models than QCT and DXA.’J. Biomechanics32 (10) (1999): 1013–1020
36.
BergmannG.DeuretzbacherG.HellerM.GraichenF.RohlmannA.StraussJ.DudaG. N.‘Hip contact forces and gait patterns from routine activities.’J. Biomechanics34 (7) (2001): 859–871
37.
TaddeiF.CristofoliniL.MartelliS.GillH. S.VicecontiM.‘Subject-specific finite element models of long bones: An in vitro evaluation of the overall accuracy.’J. Biomechanics39 (13) (2006): 2457–2467
38.
RohlmannA.MossnerU.BergmannG.KolbelR.‘Finite-element- analysis and experimental investigation in a femur with hip endoprosthesis.’J. Biomechanics16 (1983): 727–742
39.
LotzJ. C.ChealE. J.HayesW. C.‘Fracture prediction for the proximal femur using finite element models: Part I — linear analysis.’Trans. ASME, J. Biomech. Engng113 (4) (1991): 353–360
40.
AugatP.ReebH.ClaesL. E.‘Prediction of fracture load at different skeletal sites by geometrical properties of the cortical shell.’J. Bone Miner. Res.11 (9) (1996): 1356–1363
41.
MontgomeryD. C.Design and analysis of experiments (John Wiley2005)
42.
CristofoliniL.VicecontiM.‘Development and validation of a technique for strain measurement inside polymethylmethacrylate.’J. Strain Analysis35 (1) (2000): 21–33
43.
VoideR.van LentheG. H.MullerR.‘Femoral stiffness and strength critically depend on loading angle: A parametric study in a mouse-inbred strain.’Biomedizinische Technik (Berl.)53 (3) (2008): 122–129
44.
DucheminL.SkalliW.TopouchianV.BenissaM.MittonD.‘Femoral fracture load and failure energy in two load configurations: an in vitro study.’ In Proceedings of the 16th Annual Meeting of the European Orthopaedic Research Society (EORS 2006), Bologna, Italy, 7–9 June 2006 p. 094 (Cooperative Libraria Universitaria Editrice BolognaBologna).
45.
EcksteinF.WundererC.BoehmH.KuhnV.PriemelM.LinkT. M.LochmüllerE.-M.‘Reproducibility and side differences of mechanical tests for determining the structural strength of the proximal femur.’J. Bone Miner. Res.19 (3) (2004): 379–385
46.
CristofoliniL.VicecontiM.CappelloA.ToniA.‘Mechanical validation of whole bone composite femur models.’J. Biomechanics29 (4) (1996): 525–535
47.
HeinerA. D.BrownT. D.‘Structural properties of a new design of composite replicate femurs and tibias.’J. Biomechanics34 (6) (2001): 773–781
48.
AamodtA.Lund-LarsenJ.EineJ.AndersenE.BenumP.HusbyO. S.‘In vivo measurements show tensile axial strain in the proximal lateral aspect of the human femur.’J. Orthop. Res.15 (6) (1997): 927–931
49.
LanyonL. E.HampsonW. G. J.GoodshipA. E.ShahJ. S.‘Bone deformation recorded in vivo from strain gauges attached to the human tibial shaft.’Acta Orthopaedics Scandinavia46 (1975): 256–268
50.
BergmannG.GraichenF.RohlmannA.‘Hip joint loading during walking and running, measured in two patients.’J. Biomechanics26 (1993): 969–990
51.
BergmannG.GraichenF.RohlmannA.‘Hip contact forces during stumbling.’Langenbecks Arch. Surg.389 (2004): 51–59
52.
BayraktarH. H.MorganE. F.NieburG. L.MorrisG. E.WongE. K.KeavenyT. M.‘Comparison of the elastic and yield properties of human femoral trabecular and cortical bone tissue.’J. Biomechanics37 (1) (2004): 27–35
53.
CottonD. W. K.WhiteheadC. L.VyasS.CooperC.PattersonE. A.‘Are hip fractures caused by falling and breaking or breaking and falling? Photoelastic stress analysis.’Forensic Sci. Int.65 (2) (1994): 105–112
54.
KeyakJ. H.SkinnerH. B.FlemingJ. A.‘Effect of force direction on femoral fracture load for two types of loading conditions.’J. Orthop. Res.19 (4) (2001): 539–544
55.
CurreyJ.‘Whole-bone mechanics: ‘the best is the enemy of the good’.’Vet. J.177 (1) (2008): 1–2
56.
TaylorM. E.TannerK. E.FreemanM. A. R.YettramA. L.‘Stress and strain distribution within the intact femur: Compression or bending?’Med. Engng Physics18 (1996): 122–131
57.
DudaG. N.SchneiderE.ChaoE. Y. S.‘Internal forces and moments in the femur during walking.’J. Biomechanics30 (1997): 933–941
58.
CristofoliniL.CappelloA.ToniA.‘Experimental errors in the application of photoelastic coatings on human femurs with uncemented hip stems.’Strain30 (3) (1994): 95–103
