切换至 "中华医学电子期刊资源库"

中华肩肘外科电子杂志 ›› 2026, Vol. 14 ›› Issue (03) : 164 -174. doi: 10.3877/cma.j.issn.2095-5790.2026.03.006

论著

反置肩关节置换螺钉微动磨损的力学机制与固定方式优化——基于统一二维准静态模型的定量分析
王依林1, 王艳华1, 熊晨1, 郭树傲1, 付慧娟1, 刘晓智2, 王海龙3,(), 张殿英1,()   
  1. 1100044 北京大学人民医院创伤骨科
    2300450 天津,北京大学滨海医院
    3100191 北京航空航天大学物理学院
  • 收稿日期:2026-07-14 出版日期:2026-08-05
  • 通信作者: 王海龙, 张殿英
  • 基金资助:
    国家自然科学基金项目(82401731); 中央引导地方科技发展资金项目(254Z2001G); 首都卫生发展科研专项项目(2026-2-4083); 北京大学人民医院研究与发展基金(RDZH2024-01)

Micromotion wear of reverse shoulder arthroplasty screws and optimization of fixation methods— quantitative analysis based on a unified two-dimensional quasi-static model

Yilin Wang1, Yanhua Wang1, Chen Xiong1, Shuao Guo1, Huijuan Fu1, Xiaozhi Liu2, Hailong Wang3,(), Dianying Zhang1,()   

  1. 1Department of Trauma Orthopedics, Peking University People's Hospital, Beijing 100044, China
    2Peking University Binhai Hospital, Tianjin 300450, China
    3School of Physics, Beihang University, Beijing 100191, China
  • Received:2026-07-14 Published:2026-08-05
  • Corresponding author: Hailong Wang, Dianying Zhang
引用本文:

王依林, 王艳华, 熊晨, 郭树傲, 付慧娟, 刘晓智, 王海龙, 张殿英. 反置肩关节置换螺钉微动磨损的力学机制与固定方式优化——基于统一二维准静态模型的定量分析[J/OL]. 中华肩肘外科电子杂志, 2026, 14(03): 164-174.

Yilin Wang, Yanhua Wang, Chen Xiong, Shuao Guo, Huijuan Fu, Xiaozhi Liu, Hailong Wang, Dianying Zhang. Micromotion wear of reverse shoulder arthroplasty screws and optimization of fixation methods— quantitative analysis based on a unified two-dimensional quasi-static model[J/OL]. Chinese Journal of Shoulder and Elbow(Electronic Edition), 2026, 14(03): 164-174.

目的

建立涵盖正常肩关节、反置肩关节置换术(reverse shoulder arthroplasty, RSA)及同心变径假体(concentric variable-diameter prosthesis, CVDP)的统一二维准静态力学模型,定量比较三者的力臂、关节接触反力及假体-骨界面应力,阐明RSA螺钉微动磨损的力学机制,并比较RSA螺钉固定与大面积压配固定的界面应力差异。

方法

以假体球头几何中心作为坐标原点建立冠状平面直角坐标系,肩关节外展角度取值区间设定为0~90°。模型全部几何与力学参数均取自人体解剖实测结果:单侧上肢自重W=45 N,肢体重心距离旋转中心长度Lg=280 mm,三角肌止点沿肱骨轴线距离dd=100 mm,肱骨干半径Rshaft=15 mm,三角肌起点坐标A=(55, 45)mm。以力矩平衡方程组求解三角肌收缩力、关节接触反力及RSA螺钉剪切载荷,以悬臂挠曲理论量化螺钉界面微动幅度并结合磨损系数预估假体使用年限,经参数敏感性分析明确旋转中心偏移对螺钉剪切载荷的影响。

结果

旋转中心位置对名义螺钉剪切力影响显著:内移的作用存在角度依赖性,小角度和大角度下不利,仅中间角度有利;下移在所有角度均有利,但受生理结构限制可调空间有限。优化后RSA外展60°时单钉剪切力降至28.1 N,螺钉-骨界面剪切应力τRSA≈2.81 MPa,微动位移δ ≈11.6 μm,磨损速率2.75× 10-5 μm/cycle。磨损系数以临床随访数据(10年松动)标定后,模型在峰值角度的磨损寿命计算与标定基准自洽,提示螺钉剪切微动磨损机制在量级上与临床观测相容。CVDP采用无螺钉压配固定,界面面积Afix≈400 mm2,其界面剪切应力峰值仅0.244 MPa,约为RSA的1/11。

结论

RSA螺钉锚固设计存在生物力学缺陷:内移对名义螺钉剪切力的影响具有角度依赖性,在大小角度反而增大剪切力,难以借参数优化在全活动范围内改善假体寿命;下移虽全角度有利,可调空间却有限。CVDP恢复解剖旋转中心并采用大面积压配固定,在降低假体-骨界面应力方面具有生物力学优势。

Background

Reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA) shifts the glenohumeral rotation center medially and distally to lengthen the deltoid moment arm, which has become mainstream surgical treatment for patients with irreparable rotator cuff tear arthropathy. Nevertheless, long-term clinical follow-up records demonstrate a considerable revision rate caused by screw micromotion-induced wear, osteolysis and glenoid baseplate loosening, which originate from high interfacial shear stress generated by lever mechanics. Modified RSA implants with lateralized or distalized geometry can partially improve mechanical environments yet fail to eliminate screw shear damage throughout the full abduction range. A novel concentric variable-diameter prosthesis (CVDP) recovers the native anatomical rotation center and adopts humeral-side large-area press-fit fixation to avoid screw-related loosening complications. However, its biomechanical advantages have not been quantitatively verified under an integrated mechanical framework.

Objective

To establish a unified two-dimensional quasi-static rigid-body mechanical model encompassing the normal shoulder, RSA and CVDP, to quantitatively compare their moment arms, joint reaction forces, and implant-bone interface stresses, to elucidate the mechanical mechanism of screw micromotion wear in RSA, and to verify the biomechanical advantages of CVDP.

Methods

A coronal-plane coordinate system was built with the geometric sphere center as origin, and abduction angle θ ranged from 0-90°. All model parameters were derived from anatomical measurements: upper limb weight W=45 N, gravity arm Lg=280 mm, axial distance of deltoid insertion dd=100 mm, humeral shaft radius Rshaft=15 mm, and deltoid origin coordinate A= (55, 45) mm. Moment equilibrium equations were solved to calculate deltoid tension, joint reaction force and distributed shear load on RSA screws. A cantilever deflection model was adopted to quantify screw-bone micromotion, and service life was predicted via calibrated wear coefficient. Parametric sensitivity analysis was performed to assess how rotation center displacement alters screw shear load.

Results

The COR position parameters (xA, yA) significantly affected screw shear force: medialization (increasing xA) showed angle-dependent sensitivity—positive (unfavorable) at small and large abduction angles and negative (favorable) only at mid-ranges, whereas distalization (increasing yA) showed negative sensitivity across all angles, indicating a universally favorable direction but with limited physiological adjustability. For the optimized RSA (xA=70 mm, yA=55 mm) , the single-screw shear force at 60° abduction decreased to 28.1 N, with screw-bone interface shear stress τRSA≈2.81 MPa, micromotion displacement δ≈11.6 μm, wear rate per cycle of 2.75×10-5 μm/cycle (approximately 10.0 μm/year) , and the wear life calculation at the peak abduction angle (60°) is self-consistent with the calibration baseline (approximately 10 years) , indicating that the screw shear micromotion wear mechanism is quantitatively compatible with the 8-12 year radiolucent line progression window reported by Melis et al. CVDP, utilizing screwless press-fit fixation with an interface area Afix≈400 mm2 (approximately 13 times the total screw area of RSA) , achieved a peak interface shear stress of only 0.244 MPa—approximately 1/11 of RSA.

Conclusion

The RSA screw anchorage design has inherent biomechanical deficiencies: COR medialization alters the direction of the joint reaction force, increasing the shear component acting on the fixation screws at small and large abduction angles, but its sensitivity to screw shear force is angle-dependent, being unfavorable at small and large abduction angles; distalization is universally favorable but constrained by anatomy. Consequently, parameter optimization alone cannot fundamentally resolve the mechanical conflict between "increasing deltoid moment arm" and "reducing screw shear force" in RSA. CVDP, by restoring the anatomical center of rotation and employing large-area press-fit fixation, is expected to reduce the risk of screw shear wear and demonstrates biomechanical advantages in reducing implant-bone interface stress.

图1 冠状面肩关节二维准静态刚体力学模型示意图 图A:RSA模型,示三角肌合力FD、上肢重力W、关节接触反力R及其分量Nx/Ny、名义螺钉剪切力Fshear与轴向力Faxial;图B:CVDP模型,FDWR及其分量、假体-骨界面压应力σpress注:θ为肱骨干与垂线夹角;O为旋转几何中心;AxAyA)为参考点坐标尺寸标注;RSA为反置肩关节置换;CVDP为同心变径假体
图2 旋转中心偏移对名义螺钉剪切力的灵敏度分析注:基准为解剖位xA = 55mm, yA =45 mm;绿色曲线表示∂Fshear/∂xA,橙色曲线表示∂Fshear/∂yA;纵轴物理含义:∂Fshear/∂xi > 0(曲线位于零线上方)表示该参数增大1 mm时名义螺钉剪切力同向增大,即该方向偏移对假体固定不利;∂Fshear/∂xi < 0(曲线位于零线下方)表示该参数增大1 mm时剪切力反向减小,即该方向偏移对假体固定有利,曲线穿越零线的角度对应灵敏度方向反转的临界外展角
表1 肩关节生物力学模型主要参数
表2 参考位置下剪切力灵敏度系数随外展角度变化
图3 RSA旋转中心偏移前后的单钉剪切力对比注:实线为解剖位基准(xA=55 mm, yA=45 mm),虚线为优化后(xA=70mm, yA=55 mm);优化后中间角度剪切力显著降低,但小角度和大角度降低幅度有限;纵轴为单钉名义剪切力Fshear[式(8)],反映螺钉-骨界面循环剪切载荷的幅值;两曲线之差(实线-虚线)即为优化带来的剪切力降低量;该差值在30~70°区间最大(4~5 N),在5°和90°附近趋近于零甚至为负(即优化后剪切力反而略增),直观体现了内移灵敏度的角度依赖性;峰值出现在60°附近,对应重力臂Lg·sinθ最大而力臂尚未显著缩短的几何构型
表3 RSA旋转中心优化前后名义螺钉剪切力对比
图4 RSA优化后与CVDP的固定界面载荷强度对比注:RSA采用螺钉固定(A≈10 mm2/钉),CVDP采用大面积压配固定(A≈400 mm2),在外展60°时应力相差约11倍;RSA为反置肩关节置换;CVDP为同心变径假体
表4 RSA与CVDP界面剪切应力对比(外展60°)
[1]
Inman VT, Saunders JB, Abbott LC. Observations on the function of the shoulder joint[J]. J Bone Joint Surg Am, 1944, 26(1): 1-30.
[2]
Grammont PM, Baulot E. Delta shoulder prosthesis for rotator cuff rupture[J]. Orthopedics, 1993, 16(1): 65-68.
[3]
Boileau P, Watkinson DJ, Hatzidakis AM, et al. Grammont reverse prosthesis: design, rationale, and biomechanics[J]. J Shoulder Elbow Surg, 2005, 14(1 Suppl S): 147S-161S.
[4]
Neer CS II, Craig EV, Fukuda H. Cuff-tear arthropathy[J]. J Bone Joint Surg Am, 1983, 65(9): 1232-1244.
[5]
张殿英. "悬臂-杠杆重建-不稳定"理论——肱骨近端骨折治疗的新理念[J/CD]. 中华肩肘外科电子杂志, 2021, 9(4): 289-292.
[6]
张殿英, 王艳华, 付中国, 等. 基于肱骨近端悬臂-杠杆重建-不稳定理论的肱骨近端骨折治疗再认识[J/CD]. 中华肩肘外科电子杂志, 2023, 11(1): 50-56.
[7]
Werner CM, Steinmann PA, Gilbart M, et al. Treatment of painful pseudoparesis due to irreparable rotator cuff dysfunction with the Delta III reverse-ball-and-socket total shoulder prosthesis[J]. J Bone Joint Surg Am, 2005, 87(7): 1476-1486.
[8]
Cheung E, Willis M, Walker M, et al. Complications in reverse total shoulder arthroplasty[J]. J Am Acad Orthop Surg, 2011, 19(7): 439-449.
[9]
Poppen NK, Walker PS. Forces at the glenohumeral joint in abduction[J]. Clin Orthop Relat Res, 1978, (135): 165-170.
[10]
Simovitch RW, Zumstein MA, Lohri E, et al. Predictors of scapular notching in patients managed with the Delta III reverse total shoulder replacement[J]. J Bone Joint Surg Am, 2007, 89(3): 588-600.
[11]
Favre P, Sussmann PS, Gerber C. The effect of component positioning on intrinsic stability of the reverse shoulder arthroplasty[J]. J Shoulder Elbow Surg, 2010, 19(4): 550-556.
[12]
Cuff D, Pupello D, Virani N, et al. Reverse shoulder arthroplasty for the treatment of rotator cuff deficiency[J]. J Bone Joint Surg Am, 2008, 90(6): 1244-1251.
[13]
Hopkins AR, Hansen UN, Bull AMJ, et al. Fixation of the reversed shoulder prosthesis[J]. J Shoulder Elbow Surg, 2008, 17(6): 974-980.
[14]
Bonnevialle N, Geais L, Müller JH, et al. Effect of RSA glenoid baseplate central fixation on micromotion and bone stress[J]. JSES Int, 2020, 4(4):979-986.
[15]
Harman M, Frankle M, Vasey M, et al. Initial glenoid component fixation in "reverse" total shoulder arthroplasty: a biomechanical evaluation[J]. J Shoulder Elbow Surg, 2005, 14(1 Suppl S): 162S-167S.
[16]
Virani NA, Harman M, Li K, et al. In vitro and finite element analysis of glenoid bone/baseplate interaction in the reverse shoulder design[J]. J Shoulder Elbow Surg, 2008, 17(3): 509-521.
[17]
Zhang DY, Wang YH, Fu ZG, et al. 一种同心变径肩关节假体:中国, ZL 2023 1 0525143.X[P]. 2024-01-30.
[18]
Melis B, DeFranco M, Lädermann A, et al. An evaluation of the radiological changes around the Grammont reverse shoulder prostheses after eight to 12 years[J]. J Bone Joint Surg Br, 2011, 93(9): 1240-1246.
[19]
Kontaxis A, Johnson GR. The biomechanics of reverse anatomy shoulder replacement: a modelling study[J]. Clin Biomech, 2009, 24(3): 254-260.
[20]
Lippitt SB, Vanderhooft JE, Harris SL, et al. Glenohumeral stability from concavity-compression: a quantitative analysis[J]. J Shoulder Elbow Surg, 1993, 2(1): 27-35.
[21]
Matsen FA III, Harryman DT II, Sidles JA. Mechanics of glenohumeral instability[J]. Clin Sports Med, 1991, 10(4): 783-788.
[22]
Gutiérrez S, Greiwe RM, Frankle MA, et al. Biomechanical comparison of component position and hardware failure in the reverse shoulder prosthesis[J]. J Shoulder Elbow Surg, 2007, 16(3 Suppl): S9-S12.
[23]
Valenti P, Kilinc AS, Sauzières P, et al. Results of 30 reverse shoulder prostheses for revision of failed hemi- or total shoulder arthroplasty[J]. Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol, 2013, 24(8): 1375-1382.
[24]
Athwal GS, MacDermid JC, Reddy KM, et al. Does bony increased-offset reverse shoulder arthroplasty decrease scapular notching?[J]. J Shoulder Elbow Surg, 2015, 24(3): 468-473.
[25]
Amorim-Barbosa T, Ribau A, Fonte H, et al. Comparative clinical and radiologic evaluation between patients undergoing standard reversed shoulder arthroplasty or bony increased offset[J]. Clin Shoulder Elbow, 2023, 26(1):3-9.
[26]
Werner BS, Chaoui J, Walch G. Glenosphere design affects range of movement and risk of friction-type scapular impingement in reverse shoulder arthroplasty[J]. Bone Joint J, 2018, 100-B(9): 1182-1186.
[27]
Kumar K, Goyal D. Lateralisation in reverse shoulder arthroplasty - A narrative review[J]. J Clin Orthop Trauma, 2025, 62: 102881.
[28]
Greiner S, Schmidt C, Herrmann S, et al. Clinical performance of lateralized versus non-lateralized reverse shoulder arthroplasty: a prospective randomized study[J]. J Shoulder Elbow Surg, 2015, 24(9): 1397-1404.
[29]
Pape G, Bruckner T, Loew M, et al. Treatment of severe cuff tear arthropathy with the humeral head resurfacing arthroplasty: two-year minimum follow-up[J]. J Shoulder Elbow Surg, 2013, 22(1): e1-7.
[30]
Mariscalco MW, Patterson RW, Seitz WH Jr. Cup arthroplasty for rotator cuff tear arthropathy[J]. Tech Hand Up Extrem Surg, 2011, 15(1):2-5.
[31]
Polisetty TS, Colley R, Levy JC. Early clinical and radiographic results of reverse shoulder arthroplasty with press-fit metaphyseal humeral fixation[J]. Semin Arthroplasty JSES, 2021, 31(1): 171-178.
[32]
Uy M, Wang J, Horner NS, et al. Cemented humeral stem versus press-fit humeral stem in total shoulder arthroplasty: a systematic review and meta-analysis[J]. Bone Joint J, 2019, 101-B(9): 1107-1114.
[1] 钟永洌, 张杰, 张志奇. 外翻膝术后中立位机械对线的早中期疗效[J/OL]. 中华关节外科杂志(电子版), 2025, 19(03): 366-373.
[2] 何懿杰, 钟国庆, 严渊, 谢珍艳, 蔡悦鹏, 林金鹏, 黄文汉, 李丽萍, 张余. 大学生运动相关下肢损伤与下坡行走的步态运动学关联[J/OL]. 中华关节外科杂志(电子版), 2025, 19(03): 283-291.
[3] 王星棋, 申吉泓. 单支网片全尿道悬吊联合后盆生物力学重建术的临床应用[J/OL]. 中华腔镜泌尿外科杂志(电子版), 2025, 19(01): 1-6.
[4] 蒋文明, 马孝忠, 朱衡, 王贇琛, 卢超, 孙鲁宁. 基于2D-CT测量亚洲人群肩胛盂解剖学特征对反式全肩关节假体设计的参考[J/OL]. 中华肩肘外科电子杂志, 2026, 14(03): 149-156.
[5] 孙懿贤, 朱金雨, 刘一超, 孙鲁宁. 反向全肩关节置换术治疗肱骨近端骨折内固定失败的疗效分析[J/OL]. 中华肩肘外科电子杂志, 2026, 14(01): 29-37.
[6] 杜小艳, 高晓宇, 新苏雅拉图. 肩袖撕裂解剖危险因素及生物力学研究进展[J/OL]. 中华肩肘外科电子杂志, 2025, 13(03): 173-178.
[7] 王识程, 狄正林, 刘华, 章军辉. 164例反式肩关节置换术的并发症分析[J/OL]. 中华肩肘外科电子杂志, 2025, 13(03): 146-154.
[8] 廉志恒, 胡柯. 角膜生物力学参数在白内障诊治中应用的研究进展[J/OL]. 中华眼科医学杂志(电子版), 2025, 15(05): 309-313.
[9] 李彦腾, 程岗, 张剑宁. 颅脑爆震伤有限元建模及生物力学仿真分析的研究进展[J/OL]. 中华神经创伤外科电子杂志, 2025, 11(03): 180-184.
[10] 杨延江, 程晓东, 王忠正, 李泳龙, 丁凯, 崔蕴威. 仿生空心螺钉与传统空心螺钉固定股骨颈骨折的生物力学对比研究[J/OL]. 中华老年骨科与康复电子杂志, 2026, 12(02): 99-105.
[11] 林嘉琪, 邵雨薇, 栾春亮, 舒晴, 田峻. 多模态生物力学评估在非特异性腰痛临床决策中的研究进展[J/OL]. 中华老年骨科与康复电子杂志, 2026, 12(01): 59-64.
[12] 李亚伟, 潘强强, 张振辉, 周迎超, 王金炉, 王庆德, 梅伟. 蹄形超声骨刀辅助下颈后路单开门治疗多节段脊髓型颈椎病的临床研究[J/OL]. 中华老年骨科与康复电子杂志, 2026, 12(01): 25-30.
[13] 邓瑞晨, 魏新运, 肖洪岩, 杨伟胤, 谢云岗. 下肢生物力学评估在部分足踝疾病中的应用探究[J/OL]. 中华老年骨科与康复电子杂志, 2025, 11(02): 77-86.
[14] 乔凯, 田康, 陈琦, 邹吉扬, 李杰, 张卫国. 不同股骨假体屈曲角下人工膝关节生物力学特征的有限元分析[J/OL]. 中华老年骨科与康复电子杂志, 2025, 11(02): 65-76.
[15] 邓瑞晨, 肖洪岩, 魏新运, 杨伟胤, 谢云岗. 基于下肢生物力学评估经皮微创空心螺钉内固定治疗跟骨骨折的临床研究[J/OL]. 中华老年骨科与康复电子杂志, 2025, 11(01): 46-51.
阅读次数
全文


摘要


AI


AI小编
你好!我是《中华医学电子期刊资源库》AI小编,有什么可以帮您的吗?