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

doi:10.3877/cma.j.issn.2096-0263.2026.02.006

中华老年骨科与康复电子杂志 ›› 2026, Vol. 12 ›› Issue (02) : 99 -105. doi: 10.3877/cma.j.issn.2096-0263.2026.02.006

髋部骨折

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

杨延江¹^,²^,³, 程晓东¹^,²^,³, 王忠正¹^,²^,³, 李泳龙¹^,²^,³, 丁凯¹^,²^,³, 崔蕴威¹^,²^,³^,⁴^,^†(

)

¹050051　石家庄，河北医科大学第三医院创伤急救中心
²河北省骨科研究所
³河北省骨科生物力学重点实验室
⁴河北医科大学第三医院科技成果转化中心

收稿日期:2026-04-01 出版日期:2026-04-05
通信作者: 崔蕴威
基金资助:
河北省重点研发计划项目卫生健康创新专项(22377770D)

A comparative biomechanical study of bionic cannulated screws versus conventional cannulated screws for femoral neck fracture fixation

Yanjiang Yang¹^,²^,³, Xiaodong Cheng¹^,²^,³, Zhongzheng Wang¹^,²^,³, Yonglong Li¹^,²^,³, Kai Ding¹^,²^,³, Yunwei Cui¹^,²^,³^,⁴^,^†()

¹Third Hospital of Hebei Medical University
²Orthopaedic Research Institute of Hebei Province
³Key Laboratory of Biomechanics of Hebei Province
⁴Science and Technology Achievement Transformation Center of the Third Hospital of Hebei Medical University, Shijiazhuang 050051, China

Received:2026-04-01 Published:2026-04-05
Corresponding author: Yunwei Cui

全文 ( ) 下载PDF ( ) 导出引用

引用本文：

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.

Yanjiang Yang, Xiaodong Cheng, Zhongzheng Wang, Yonglong Li, Kai Ding, Yunwei Cui. A comparative biomechanical study of bionic cannulated screws versus conventional cannulated screws for femoral neck fracture fixation[J/OL]. Chinese Journal of Geriatric Orthopaedics and Rehabilitation(Electronic Edition), 2026, 12(02): 99-105.

目的

比较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性能。

方法

取10具新鲜冷冻成人股骨标本，随机分为实验组（仿生空心螺钉固定）和对照组（传统空心螺钉固定），每组5具。建立完整股骨固定模型测试后，于同一标本制备PauwelsⅢ型股骨颈骨折模型。于600 N轴向载荷下测量整体位移、股骨颈区域平均应变及骨折线周围分区应变。

结果

完整股骨固定模型下，实验组前、后侧整体位移均大于对照组，差异有统计学意义（P<0.05），两组股骨颈区域平均应变差异无统计学意义（P>0.05）。骨折模型下，两组整体位移、平均应变及分区应变差异均无统计学意义（P>0.05）。

结论

仿生空心螺钉固定PauwelsⅢ型股骨颈骨折可提供初始稳定性，为后期骨整合提供有利的力学环境。

关键词: 股骨颈骨折, 仿生空心螺钉, 空心螺钉, 生物力学, 初始稳定性

Objective

To compare the biomechanical properties of bionic cannulated screws and conventional cannulated screws for the fixation of femoral neck fractures.

Methods

Ten fresh-frozen adult femoral specimens were randomly assigned into an experimental group and a control group, with 5 specimens in each group. The experimental group was fixed with bionic cannulated screws, and the control group with conventional cannulated screws. An intact femur fixation model was first established, followed by a Pauwels type Ⅲ femoral neck fracture model in the same specimen. Under an axial load of 600 N, overall displacement, mean strain in the femoral neck region, and regional strain around the fracture line were measured.

Results

In the intact femur fixation model, the overall displacement on both the anterior and posterior sides was significantly greater in the experimental group than in the control group (P<0.05), whereas no significant difference was found in the mean strain of the femoral neck region between the two groups (P>0.05). In the fracture model, no significant differences were observed between the two groups in overall displacement, mean strain, or regional strain (P>0.05).

Conclusions

Bionic cannulated screws fixation for Pauwels type Ⅲ femoral neck fractures can provide initial stability and create a favorable mechanical environment for subsequent osseointegration.

Key words: Femoral neck fracture, Bionic cannulated screw, Cannulated screw, Biomechanics, Initial stability

图1 传统空心螺钉和新型仿生空心螺钉对比

图2 （A）传统空心螺钉固定模拟愈合期；（B）仿生空心螺钉固定模拟愈合期；（C）Pauwels Ⅲ型股骨颈骨折期传统空心螺钉固定模拟；（D）Pauwels Ⅲ型股骨颈骨折期仿生空心螺钉固定模拟。（E）骨折愈合期应变测量区域。（F）骨折期应变测量区域（Part-1至Part-4）

表1 传统与仿生空心螺钉在愈合及骨折状态下不同侧面整体位移的生物力学比较（

±s）

组别	例数	愈合状态		骨折状态
组别	例数	前侧面（mm）	后侧面（mm）	前侧面（mm）	后侧面（mm）
传统空心螺钉组	5	0.57±0.21	0.40±0.17	0.98±0.41	0.91±0.39
仿生空心螺钉组	5	0.96±0.32	0.77±0.32	1.14±0.54	1.16±0.61
t值		2.527	2.508	0.560	0.158
P值		0.030	0.031	0.588	0.878

表1 传统与仿生空心螺钉在愈合及骨折状态下不同侧面整体位移的生物力学比较（

±s）

组别	例数	愈合状态		骨折状态
组别	例数	前侧面（mm）	后侧面（mm）	前侧面（mm）	后侧面（mm）
传统空心螺钉组	5	0.57±0.21	0.40±0.17	0.98±0.41	0.91±0.39
仿生空心螺钉组	5	0.96±0.32	0.77±0.32	1.14±0.54	1.16±0.61
t值		2.527	2.508	0.560	0.158
P值		0.030	0.031	0.588	0.878

图3　骨折愈合状态下的两组位移云图。（A，B）传统空心螺钉组的前侧面和后侧面；（C，D）仿生空心螺钉组的前侧面和后侧面　图4　骨折状态下的两组位移云图。（A，B）传统空心螺钉组的前侧面和后侧面；（C，D）仿生空心螺钉组的前侧面和后侧面　图5　骨折愈合状态下的两组应变云图。（A，B）传统空心螺钉组的前侧面和后侧面；（C，D）仿生空心螺钉组的前侧面和后侧面　图6　骨折状态下的两组应变云图。（A，B）传统空心螺钉组的前侧面和后侧面；（C，D）仿生空心螺钉组的前侧面和后侧面

表2 传统与仿生空心螺钉在愈合及骨折状态下不同侧面股骨颈区域应变的生物力学比较（

±s）

组别	例数	愈合状态（μm/m）		骨折状态（μm/m）
组别	例数	前侧面	后侧面	前侧面	后侧面
传统空心螺钉组	5	759.45±312.52	732.43±364.55	1 006.35±475.34	943.44±369.49
仿生空心螺钉组	5	833.43±389.45	809.08±386.31	1 025.37±436.66	990.26±394.33
t值		0.363	0.354	0.074	1.356
P值		0.724	0.731	0.943	0.212

表2 传统与仿生空心螺钉在愈合及骨折状态下不同侧面股骨颈区域应变的生物力学比较（

±s）

组别	例数	愈合状态（μm/m）		骨折状态（μm/m）
组别	例数	前侧面	后侧面	前侧面	后侧面
传统空心螺钉组	5	759.45±312.52	732.43±364.55	1 006.35±475.34	943.44±369.49
仿生空心螺钉组	5	833.43±389.45	809.08±386.31	1 025.37±436.66	990.26±394.33
t值		0.363	0.354	0.074	1.356
P值		0.724	0.731	0.943	0.212

表3 传统空心螺钉与仿生空心螺钉在骨折状态下股骨颈不同区域前后侧面应变的定量比较（

±s）

组别	例数	前侧面（μm/m）
组别	例数	区域1	区域2	区域3	区域4
传统空心螺钉组	5	1272.90±644.87	1336.95±602.43	486.72±253.66	233.50±116.55
仿生空心螺钉组	5	1317.23±671.63	1407.51±528.85	690.71±355.98	372.84±184.01
t值		0.117	0.216	1.143	1.567
P值		0.909	0.834	0.280	0.148
组别	例数	后侧面（μm/m）
组别	例数	区域1	区域2	区域3	区域4
传统空心螺钉组	5	612.03±339.25	505.06±260.24	471.82±218.52	285.43±134.77
仿生空心螺钉组	5	726.67±328.34	573.34±282.84	437.20±202.39	200.46±100.61
t值		0.595	0.435	0.285	1.238
P值		0.565	0.673	0.782	0.244

表3 传统空心螺钉与仿生空心螺钉在骨折状态下股骨颈不同区域前后侧面应变的定量比较（

±s）

组别	例数	前侧面（μm/m）
组别	例数	区域1	区域2	区域3	区域4
传统空心螺钉组	5	1272.90±644.87	1336.95±602.43	486.72±253.66	233.50±116.55
仿生空心螺钉组	5	1317.23±671.63	1407.51±528.85	690.71±355.98	372.84±184.01
t值		0.117	0.216	1.143	1.567
P值		0.909	0.834	0.280	0.148
组别	例数	后侧面（μm/m）
组别	例数	区域1	区域2	区域3	区域4
传统空心螺钉组	5	612.03±339.25	505.06±260.24	471.82±218.52	285.43±134.77
仿生空心螺钉组	5	726.67±328.34	573.34±282.84	437.20±202.39	200.46±100.61
t值		0.595	0.435	0.285	1.238
P值		0.565	0.673	0.782	0.244

1	Xia W, Zhang A, Qiu B, et al. Femoral neck fracture after femoral head necrosis: a case report and review of the literature [J]. BMC Musculoskelet Disord, 2023, 24(1): 853.
2	张于，程亮亮，王峰，等. 2枚与3枚空心钉治疗无移位股骨颈骨折的疗效对比[J].中华老年骨科与康复电子杂志, 2024, 10(05): 281-286.
3	单良，刘怡，于涛，等.老年股骨颈骨折术后患者心理弹性现状及影响因素分析[J].中华老年骨科与康复电子杂志, 2024, 10(05): 294-300.
4	Ding K, Zhu Y, Li J, et al. Age-related Changes with the Trabecular Bone of Ward's Triangle and Neck-shaft Angle in the Proximal Femur: A Radiographic Study [J]. Orthop Surg, 2023, 15(12): 3279-3287.
5	Yang Y, Tong Y, Cheng X, et al. Comparative study of a novel proximal femoral bionic nail and three conventional cephalomedullary nails for reverse obliquity intertrochanteric fractures: a finite element analysis [J]. Front Bioeng Biotechnol, 2024, 12: 1393154.
6	Osawa Y, An Y, Nishita Y, et al. Longitudinal association between muscle and bone loss: Results of US and Japanese cohort studies [J]. J Cachexia Sarcopenia Muscle, 2024, 15(2): 746-755.
7	权元元，丁凯，王海程，等.骨小梁的形态结构和生物力学性能研究进展[J].中华老年骨科与康复电子杂志, 2024, 10(02): 123-128.
8	Fu CW, Chen JY, Liu YC, et al. Dynamic Hip Screw with Trochanter-Stabilizing Plate Compared with Proximal Femoral Nail Antirotation as a Treatment for Unstable AO/OTA 31-A2 and 31-A3 Intertrochanteric Fractures [J]. Biomed Res Int, 2020, 2020: 1896935.
9	Alessio-Mazzola M, Traverso G, Coccarello F, et al. Dynamic hip screw versus intramedullary nailing for the treatment of A1 intertrochanteric fractures: A retrospective, comparative study and cost analysis [J]. Jt Dis Relat Surg, 2022, 33(2): 314-322.
10	Li K, Liu JS, Wu M, et al. Robot-assisted versus conventional freehand hollow-screw fixation for the management of femoral neck fractures: A meta-analysis [J]. Asian J Surg, 2024, 47(11): 4878-4880.
11	Ang JJM, Onggo JR, Stokes CM, et al. Comparing direct anterior approach versus posterior approach or lateral approach in total hip arthroplasty: a systematic review and meta-analysis [J]. Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol, 2023, 33(7): 2773-2792.
12	Xie X, Bi S, Song Q, et al. Biomechanical evaluation of percutaneous compression plate and femoral neck system in Pauwels type Ⅲ femoral neck fractures [J]. J Orthop Traumatol, 2024, 25(1): 61.
13	Jung CH, Cha Y, Yoon HS, et al. Mechanical effects of surgical variations in the femoral neck system on Pauwels type Ⅲ femoral neck fracture: a finite element analysis [J]. Bone Joint Res, 2022, 11(2): 102-111.
14	Lin PP, Kang HG, Kim YI, et al. Minimally invasive surgery for femoral neck fractures using bone cement infusible hollow-perforated screw in high-risk patients with advanced cancer [J]. Surg Oncol, 2015, 24(3): 226-231.
15	Pei F, Zhao R, Li F, et al. Osteonecrosis of femoral head in young patients with femoral neck fracture: a retrospective study of 250 patients followed for average of 7.5 years [J]. J Orthop Surg Res, 2020, 15(1): 238.
16	Hegde V, Harris AB, Springer BD, et al. Cemented Stem Design in Total Hip Arthroplasty: Fixation Philosophies, Biomechanics, and an Updated Classification System [J]. J Am Acad Orthop Surg, 2024, 32(12): 525-534.
17	Shrivas NV, Tiwari AK, Kumar R, et al. Physiological Loading-Induced Interstitial Fluid Dynamics in Osteon of Osteogenesis Imperfecta Bone [J]. J Biomech Eng, 2021, 143(8): 081011.
18	Cui Y, Ding K, Lv H, et al. Biomechanical optimization of the magnesium alloy bionic cannulated screw for stabilizing femoral neck fractures: a finite element analysis [J]. Front Bioeng Biotechnol, 2024, 12: 1448527.
19	Yao MX, Zheng JC, Wang HC, et al. Application of biphasic mineralized collagen/polycaprolactone scaffolds in the repair of large load-bearing bone defects: A study in a sheep model [J]. J Orthop Translat, 2025, 52: 138-149.
20	Slobogean GP, Sprague SA, Scott T, et al. Complications following young femoral neck fractures [J]. Injury, 2015, 46(3): 484-491.
21	Cha YH, Yoo JI, Hwang SY, et al. Biomechanical Evaluation of Internal Fixation of Pauwels Type Ⅲ Femoral Neck Fractures: A Systematic Review of Various Fixation Methods [J]. Clin Orthop Surg, 2019, 11(1): 1-14.
22	Stoffel K, Zderic I, Gras F, et al. Biomechanical Evaluation of the Femoral Neck System in Unstable Pauwels Ⅲ Femoral Neck Fractures: A Comparison with the Dynamic Hip Screw and Cannulated Screws [J]. J Orthop Trauma, 2017, 31(3): 131-137.
23	Jiang X, Liang K, Du G, et al. Biomechanical evaluation of different internal fixation methods based on finite element analysis for Pauwels type Ⅲ femoral neck fracture [J]. Injury, 2022, 53(10): 3115-3123.
24	Liverani E, Rogati G, Pagani S, et al. Mechanical interaction between additive-manufactured metal lattice structures and bone in compression: implications for stress shielding of orthopaedic implants [J]. J Mech Behav Biomed Mater, 2021, 121: 104608.
25	Wang R, Ni S, Ma L, et al. Porous construction and surface modification of titanium-based materials for osteogenesis: A review [J]. Front Bioeng Biotechnol, 2022, 10: 973297.
26	Ma Z, Liu R, Cao F, et al. Bone screws of porous silicon carbide coated with tantalum improve osseointegration and osteogenesis in goat femoral neck fractures [J]. Biomedical Materials, 2021, 16(5): 055013.
27	Wang K, Ni M, Liao P, et al. Fracture morphology and biomechanical characteristics of Pauwels Ⅲ femoral neck fractures in young adults [J]. Injury, 2021, 52(11): 3227-3238.

[1]	温瑛钰, 刘轶鹏, 时建文. 全髋关节置换术治疗创伤性股骨颈骨折的近期效果[J/OL]. 中华关节外科杂志(电子版), 2025, 19(06): 767-771.
[2]	吴超, 王争刚, 罗晓东, 范斌, 刘彬. 骨科机器人辅助动力交叉钉治疗不稳定型股骨颈骨折[J/OL]. 中华关节外科杂志(电子版), 2025, 19(06): 669-676.
[3]	翟禹樵, 鲜思平, 陈明灿, 蒋珊. 动力交叉钉治疗股骨颈骨折后早期股骨头坏死风险预测[J/OL]. 中华关节外科杂志(电子版), 2025, 19(04): 402-408.
[4]	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.
[5]	冯文广, 孙艳宏, 李鸿昌, 赵挺祺, 刘海波, 王海彬, 张国梁. 创伤性股骨头骨折的诊断与治疗进展[J/OL]. 中华关节外科杂志(电子版), 2025, 19(03): 343-349.
[6]	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.
[7]	皮颖, 张强, 黄志荣. 80 岁以上股骨颈骨折患者术后1 年死亡率的预测因素[J/OL]. 中华关节外科杂志(电子版), 2025, 19(01): 13-20.
[8]	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.
[9]	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.
[10]	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.
[11]	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.
[12]	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.
[13]	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.
[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, 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.

阅读次数

全文

摘要

选择文件类型/文献管理软件名称

选择包含的内容

A comparative biomechanical study of bionic cannulated screws versus conventional cannulated screws for femoral neck fracture fixation

模态框（Modal）标题

选择文件类型/文献管理软件名称

选择包含的内容

A comparative biomechanical study of bionic cannulated screws versus conventional cannulated screws for femoral neck fracture fixation