journal article·2024-09-25Open access

Microfilm Coatings: A Biomaterial-Based Strategy for Modulating Femoral Deflection

Ana Elisabeth Olivares-Hernandez, Miguel Angel Olivares-Robles, Juan Vicente Méndez-Méndez, Claudia Gutiérrez-Camacho

Journal of Functional Biomaterials· Volume 15· Issue 10

Abstract

Wear on the surface of the femoral head increases the risk of hip and femur fractures. Biomechanical experiments conducted on the femur are based on its bending and torsional rigidities. Studies regarding the deflection of the femur bone when the femoral head is coated with microfilms composed of durable and compatible biomaterials are poor. This study aimed to investigate the effects of different biomaterial microfilm coatings over the femoral head on the deflection of the human femur. We utilized 2023 R1 finite element analysis (FEA) software to model the directional deformation on the femoral head and examine the femur’s deflection with varying microfilm thicknesses. The deflection of the femur bone was reported when the femoral head was uncoated and coated with titanium, stainless steel, and pure gold microfilms of different thicknesses (namely, 50, 75, and 100 μm). Our results show that the femur’s minimum and maximum deflection occurred for stainless steel and gold, respectively. The deformation of the femur was lower when the femoral head was coated with a 50-micrometer microfilm of stainless steel, compared to the deformation obtained with gold and titanium. When the thickness of the microfilm for each of the materials was increased, the deformation continued to decrease. The minimum deformation of the femur occurred for a thickness of 100 μm with stainless steel, followed by titanium and gold. The difference in the directional deformation of the femur between the materials was more significant when the coating was 100 μm, compared to the thicknesses of 50 and 75 μm. The findings of this study are expected to significantly contribute to the development of advanced medical techniques to enhance the quality of life for patients with femur bone-related issues. This information can be used to develop more resilient coatings that can withstand wear and tear.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline

Research context

OpenAlex topics: Orthopaedic implants and arthroplasty · Orthopedic Infections and Treatments · Hip disorders and treatments

SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.

Affiliations

Instituto Politecnico Nacional, Seccion de Estudios de Posgrado e Investigacion, Escuela Nacional de Ciencias Biologicas, Ciudad de Mexico 11340, Mexico

Instituto Politecnico Nacional, Seccion de Estudios de Posgrado e Investigacion, Escuela Superior de Ingenieria Mecanica y Electrica Unidad Culhuacan, Coyoacan, Ciudad de Mexico 04430, Mexico

Instituto Politecnico Nacional, Centro de Nanociencias y Micro y Nanotecnologías, “Unidad Profesional Adolfo Lopez Mateos”, Luis Enrico Erro s/n, Ciudad de Mexico 07738, Mexico

Hospital Infantil de Mexico Federico Gomez, Direccion de Enseñanza y Desarrollo Académico, Ciudad de Mexico 06720, Mexico

Funding

National Polytechnic Institute · National Council for Science and Technology CONAHCYT-Mexico

References (54)

Show source-provided references
1. Papini, M., Zdero, R., Schemitsch, E.H., and Zalzal, P. (2007). The Biomechanics of Human Femurs in Axial and Torsional Loading: Comparison of Finite Element Analysis, Human Cadaveric Femurs, and Synthetic Femurs. J. Biomech. Eng., 129.10.1115/1.2401178 ↗
2. Incidencia y factores de riesgo de la fractura de fémur proximal por osteoporosis10.1590/S1020-49891998000400001 ↗
3. Fractures attributable to osteoporosis:b Report from the National Osteoporosis Foundation Journal of bone and mineral research10.1359/jbmr.1997.12.1.16 ↗
4. Características de las fracturas de cadera: A propósito del análisis de historias clínicas en tres hospitales universitarios colombianos
5. Past fractures indicate increased risk of hip fracture10.3109/17453678608994406 ↗
6. Osteoporosis and osteomalacia10.1016/S0300-595X(80)80026-0 ↗
8. Are patients with hip fractures more osteoporotic?10.1016/0002-9343(85)90343-2 ↗
9. Simple measurement of femoral geometry predicts hip fracture: The study of osteoporotic fractures10.1002/jbmr.5650081008 ↗
10. Influencia de la obesidad sobre el metabolismo óseo10.1016/j.endonu.2016.08.005 ↗
11. Hueso: Alteraciones relacionadas con obesidad10.22201/fm.24484865e.2021.64.1.02 ↗
12. Influencia de la obesidad sobre la microarquitectura y las propiedades biomecánicas en pacientes con fractura de cadera10.4321/S1889-836X2017000100004 ↗
13. Tratamiento quirúrgico de las fracturas de cadera
14. The worldwide problem of osteoporosis: Insights afforded by epidemiology10.1016/8756-3282(95)00258-4 ↗
15. Rüedi, T.P., and Murphy, W.M. (2007). AO Principles of Fracture Management, Davos Platz [Switzerland]: Thieme; AO Pub.
16. Características de las fracturas de fémur proximal10.1016/j.reper.2017.09.002 ↗
17. Úlceras por presión en el postoperatorio de intervenciones quirúrgicas de cadera o de rodilla
18. Complicaciones postoperatorias tempranas en reemplazo primario de cadera por artrosis entre 2012–201610.1016/j.reper.2017.07.002 ↗
19. Short-duration prophylaxis against venous thromboembolism after total hip or knee replacement: A meta-analysis of prospective studies investigating symptomatic outcomes10.1001/archinte.162.13.1465 ↗
20. Fracturas periprotésicas de cadera
21. Epidemiology: Hip and knee10.1016/S0030-5898(05)70073-0 ↗
22. Patient-specific finite element modeling of bones10.1177/0954411912467884 ↗
23. Stress distributions within the proximal femur during gait and falls: Implications for osteoporotic fractures10.1007/BF01774015 ↗
24. Finite Element analysis of different internal fixation methods for the treatment of Pauwels type III femoral neck fracture
25. Yadav, D., and Garg, R.K. (2022). Comparative Analysis of Mechanical Behavior of Femur Bone of Different Age and Sex Using FEA. En Advances in Mechanical Engineering and Technology: Proceedings of 6th International Conference on Advanced Production and Industrial Engineering (ICAPIE)-2021, Springer.10.1007/978-981-16-9613-8_3 ↗
26. Layrolle, P. (2017). 1.16 Calcium Phosphate Coatings. Comprehensive Biomaterials II, Elsevier.10.1016/B978-0-08-100691-7.00213-5 ↗
27. Primary total knee arthroplasty in super-obese patients: Dramatically higher postoperative complication rates even compared to revision surgery10.1016/j.arth.2014.12.016 ↗
28. Calcium phosphate coatings elaborated by the soaking process on titanium dental implants: Surface preparation, processing and physical–chemical characterization10.1016/j.dental.2018.10.005 ↗
29. Jansen, J. (2009). Thin Calcium Phosphate Coatings for Medical Implants, Springer.
30. Bohara, S., and Suthakorn, J. (2022). Surface coating of orthopedic implant to enhance the osseointegration and reduction of antibacterial colonization: A review. Biomater. Res., 26.10.1186/s40824-022-00269-3 ↗
31. Vogel, D., Wehmeyer, M., Kebbach, M., Heyer, H., and Bader, R. (2021). Stress and strain distribution in femoral heads for hip resurfacing arthroplasty with different materials: A finite element analysis. J. Mech. Behav. Biomed. Mater., 113.10.1016/j.jmbbm.2020.104115 ↗
32. Filip, N., Radu, I., Veliceasa, B., Filip, C., Pertea, M., Clim, A., Pinzau, A.C., Drochioi, I.C., Hilitanu, R.L., and Serban, I.L. (2022). Biomaterials in Orthopedic Devices: Current Issues and Future Perspectives. Coatings, 12.10.3390/coatings12101544 ↗
33. The biomechanical profile of an osseointegrated rectangular block implant: A pilot in vivo experimental study10.1111/clr.13834 ↗
34. Estimation of Porosity Effect on Mechanical Properties in Calcium Phosphate Cement Reinforced by Strontium Nitrate Nanoparticles: Fabrication and FEM Analysis10.1007/s13369-023-08050-x ↗
35. Auciello, O., Renou, S., Kang, K., Tasat, D., and Olmedo, D. (2022). A Biocompatible Ultrananocrystalline Diamond (UNCD) Coating for a New Generation of Dental Implants. Nanomaterials, 12.10.3390/nano12050782 ↗
36. Isaza, E., García, L., and Salazar, E. (2013, January 9–11). Determination of Mechanic Resistance of Osseous Element through Finite Element Modeling. Proceedings of the 2013 COMSOL Conference, Boston, MA, USA. Available online: https://grabcad.com/library/femur--1.
37. Assessing the weight-bearing surface in dysplastic acetabulae: The sourcil index10.1016/j.artd.2021.07.006 ↗
38. Sadeghi, R., Bakhtiari-Nejad, F., and Goudarzi, T. (2018, January 26–29). Vibrational Analysis of Human Femur Bone. Proceedings of the ASME 2018 International Design Engineering Technical Conferences and Computers and Information in Engineering Conference, Quebec City, QC, Canada. V008T10A045.
39. Material optimization for femur bone implants based on vibration analysis10.1016/j.matpr.2020.04.714 ↗
40. Recent development of dental implant materials, synthesis process, and failure—A review10.1016/j.rechem.2023.101136 ↗
41. Resnik, M., Benčina, M., Levičnik, E., Rawat, N., Iglič, A., and Junkar, I. (2020). Strategies for improving antimicrobial properties of stainless steel. Materials, 13.10.3390/ma13132944 ↗
42. Mechanical properties of 3D-printed orthopedic one-third tubular plates and cortical screws10.2217/3dp-2022-0007 ↗
43. Should the galvanic combination of titanium and stainless steel surgical implants be avoided?10.1016/j.injury.2007.07.015 ↗
44. Bharadwaj, A. (2021). An overview on biomaterials and its applications in medical science. IOP Conference Series: Materials Science and Engineering, IOP Publishing.10.1088/1757-899X/1116/1/012178 ↗
45. Al-Shalawi, F.D., Mohamed Ariff, A.H., Jung, D.W., Mohd Ariffin MK, A., Seng Kim, C.L., Brabazon, D., and Al-Osaimi, M.O. (2023). Biomaterials as implants in the orthopedic field for regenerative medicine: Metal versus synthetic polymers. Polymers, 15.10.3390/polym15122601 ↗
46. Emerging magnesium-based biomaterials for orthopedic implantation
47. Ansys Library (2024, September 22). Engineering Data. Section Analysis Systems: Static Structural. Available online: https://www.ansys.com/products/materials/materials-data-for-simulation.
48. Pérez-Cano, F.D., Jiménez-Pérez, J.R., Molina-Viedma, A.J., López-Alba, E., Luque-Luque, A., Delgado-Martínez, A., Díaz-Garrido, F.A., and Jiménez-Delgado, J.J. (2023). Human femur fracture by mechanical compression: Towards the repeatability of bone fracture acquisition. Comput. Biol. Med., 164.10.1016/j.compbiomed.2023.107249 ↗
49. Amini, M., Reisinger, A., Hirtler, L., and Pahr, D. (2021). Which experimental procedures influence the apparent proximal femoral stiffness? A parametric study. BMC Musculoskelet. Disord., 22.10.1186/s12891-021-04656-0 ↗
50. Biomechanical study of the resurfacing hip arthroplasty: Finite element analysis of the femoral component10.1054/arth.2000.1359 ↗
51. Finite element analysis of the resurfaced femoral head10.1243/095441105X93631 ↗
52. Bone remodelling inside a cemented resurfaced femoral head10.1016/j.clinbiomech.2006.01.010 ↗
53. Morbid obesity and total knee arthroplasty: A growing problem10.5435/JAAOS-D-15-00684 ↗
54. An overview and management of osteoporosis10.5152/eurjrheum.2016.048 ↗