Abstract
Introduction
Porous scaffolds for bone ingrowth have numerous applications, including correcting deformities in the foot and ankle. Various materials and shapes may be selected for bridging an osteotomy in a corrective procedure. This research explores the performance of commercially pure Titanium (CPTi) and Tantalum (Ta) porous scaffold materials for use in foot and ankle applications under simplified compression loading.
Methods
Finite element analysis was performed to evaluate von Mises stress in 3 porous implant designs: 1) a CPTi foot and ankle implant (Fig 1) 2) a similar Ta implant (wedge angle = 5°) and 3) a similar Ta implant with an increased wedge angle of 20°. Properties were assigned per reported material and density specifications. Clinically relevant axial compressive load of 2.5X BW (2154 N) was applied through fixtures which conform to ASTM F2077–11.
Compressive yield and fatigue strength was evaluated per ASTM F2077–11 to compare CPTi performance in design 1 to the Ta performance of design 3.
Results
FEA results indicate peak stresses at fixture contact locations. Similar designs (CPTi design 1 and Ta design 2) resulted in similar von Mises stresses (Fig 1). Increasing the wedge angle (Ta design 3) increased stress by 15%.
The static compressive yield strength of CPTi design 1 (20,560 N) was similar to the Ta design 3 (20,902 N), with yield manifesting as barreling and crushing of the components (Fig 2a). However, the fatigue strength of CPTi (6,000 N) was 40% lower than the Ta design 3 (9,500 N) (Fig 3). In both cases fracture initiated from regions of highest stress predicted in FEA. Fracture progression was not instantaneous and was characterized by an accumulation of damage (Fig 2b–c) leading to gross component fracture and loss of implant integrity.
Discussion
FEA is a useful tool to determine stress variations and can be used to identify worst case within a material: in this case, a larger implant wedge angle leads to higher stresses. Additionally, FEA accurately predicted fracture initiation location. However, material selection plays a large role in porous implant performance: although FEA predicted higher stresses in a Ta component with a greater wedge angle than a similar sized CPTi component, static compressive strengths were nearly identical, and the Ta component had 58% higher fatigue strength.
When selecting a material or geometry for an implant application, both FEA and static testing allow for rapid evaluation of designs. However, caution should be used in interpreting the results: the ultimate performance of an implant in-vivo will depend on its ability to maintain integrity over a long period of time, and should be characterized by dynamic testing.
