Journal of Bionic Engineering (2023) 20:2814–2825https://doi.org/10.1007/s42235-023-00413-2

Jumbo Bionic Trabecular Metal Acetabular Cups Improve Cup Stability During Acetabular Bone Defect Reconstruction: A Finite Element Analysis Study 

Jianlin Xiao1,2 · Haowen Xue3  · Zhihui Qian2  · Shenghao Xu1  · Xianyue Shen4  · Zhuo Zhang1  · Lei Ren2,5 · Luquan Ren2,5

Xianyue Shen shenxianyue0616@163.com * Zhuo Zhang zhangzhuo1987@jlu.edu.cn * Lei Ren lren@jlu.edu.cn 

1 Department of Orthopedics, China-Japan Union Hospital of Jilin University, Changchun 130033, China 

2 Key Laboratory of Bionic Engineering Ministry of Education, Changchun 130025, China 

3 Department of Orthopedics, The Second Hospital of Jilin University, Changchun 130041, China 

4 Department of Orthopedics, The First Afliated Hospital of University of Science and Technology of C

hina, Anhui Provincial Hospital, Hefei 230001, China 

5 Weihai Institute for Bionics-Jilin University, Weihai 264400, China

Abstract: The biomechanical efects of acetabular revision with jumbo cups are unclear. This study aimed to compare the biomechanical efects of bionic trabecular metal vs. titanium jumbo cups for the revision of acetabular bone defects. We designed and reconstructed American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons (AAOS) type I–III acetabular bone defect models using computed tomography scans of a man without acetabular bone defects. The implantation of titanium and trabecular metal jumbo cups was simulated. Stress distribution and relative micromotion between the cup and host bone were assessed using fnite element analysis. Contact stress on the screws fxing the cups was also analyzed. The contact stress analysis showed that the peak contact stress between the titanium jumbo cup and the host bone was 21.7, 20.1, and 23.8 MPa in the AAOS I–III models, respectively; the corresponding values for bionic tantalum jumbo cups decreased to 4.7, 6.7, and 11.1 MPa. Analysis of the relative micromotion showed that the peak relative micromotion between the host bone and the titanium metal cup was 10.2, 9.1, and 11.5 μm in the AAOS I–III models, respectively; the corresponding values for bionic trabecular metal cups were 17.2, 18.2, and 31.3 μm. The peak contact stress on the screws was similar for the 2 cup types, and was concentrated on the screw rods. Hence, acetabular reconstruction with jumbo cups is biomechanically feasible. We recommend trabecular metal cups due to their superior stress distribution and higher relative micromotion, which is within the threshold for adequate bone ingrowth. 

Keywords: Acetabular bone defect · Finite element analysis · Trabecular metal · Jumbo cup