How accurately do finite element models predict the fall impact response of ex vivo specimens augmented by prophylactic intramedullary nailing?

Abstract

Hip fracture prevention approaches like prophylactic augmentation devices have been proposed to strengthen the femur and prevent hip fracture in a fall scenario. The aim of this study was to validate the finite element model (FEM) of specimens augmented by prophylactic intramedullary nailing in a simulated sideways fall impact against ex vivo experimental data. A dynamic inertia-driven sideways fall simulator was used to test six cadaveric specimens (3 females, 3 males, age 63-83 years) prophylactically implanted with an intramedullary nailing system used to augment the femur. Impact force measurements, pelvic deformation, effective pelvic stiffness, and fracture outcomes were compared between the ex vivo experiments and the FEMs. The FEMs over-predicted the effective pelvic stiffness for most specimens and showed variability in terms of under- and over-predicting peak impact force and pelvis compression depending on the specimen. A significant correlation was found for time to peak impact force when comparing ex vivo and FEM data. No femoral fractures were found in the ex vivo experiments, but two specimens sustained pelvic fractures. These two pelvis fractures were correctly identified by the FEMs, but the FEMs made three additional false-positive fracture identifications. These validation results highlight current limitations of these sideways fall impact models specific to the inclusion of an orthopaedic implant. These FEMs present a conservative strategy for fracture prediction in future applications. Further evaluation of the modelling approaches used for the bone-implant interface is recommended for modelling augmented specimens, alongside the importance of maintaining well-controlled experimental conditions.