Table 3.
Implant type, design and validation strategies, and stress shielding measured of studies applying uniform porosity designs
| Study | Implant type | Lattice design | Main design parameter | Computational validation | Experimental validation | Main stress shielding measure | Max. stress shielding reduction * | Overall quality score |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| [81] | Hip acetabular cup | Extensive porous surface | Pore size, porosity, elastic modulus | – | Clinical study, radiographic assessment | Stress shielding grading system |
Absent − 60% Mild + 58% Moderate − 100% Severe + 100% |
17 |
| [33] | Hip femoral stem | Simple gyroid—solid outer skin | Elastic modulus | – | – | Elastic modulus | Not quantified | 14 |
| [39] | Hip femoral stem | Auxetic—porous proximal part | Elastic modulus | Implanted model | – | Stress and strain in bone |
Stress + 27% Strain + 83% |
18 |
| [40] | Hip femoral stem | Cubic—porous proximal part | Pore size | Implanted model | – | Stress and strain in bone |
Stress + 7% Strain + 15% |
17 |
| [36, 37] | Hip femoral stem | Rhombic dodecahedron—fully porous | Elastic modulus | Implanted model | Flexure testing, implanted model | Stress in bone, bone surface strains | Not quantified | 18 |
| [29] | Hip femoral stem | Cubic—solid outer skin | Strut size | Bending test | Bending test | Bending stiffness | Bending stiffness − 60% | 16 |
| [26, 42] | Hip femoral stem | Diamond—solid outer skin except for proximal part | Elastic modulus | ISO 7206-4, implanted model | Implanted model | Bone resorption |
Formation − 18% Homeostasis + 6% Resorption -19% |
22 |
| [14, 27] | Hip femoral stem | Body-centered cubic (BCC)—solid outer skin with beads in proximal part | Porosity | ISO 7206-4, implanted model | – | Stress in bone, stress shielding increase |
Gruen zone 7: − 28% SSI − 90% |
19 |
| [35] | Hip femoral stem | Body-centered cubic (BCC) | Mechanical properties | Implanted model | – | Stress shielding signal (SSS) | SSS − 81% (up to) | 18 |
| [41] | Hip femoral stem | Face and body-centered cubic with z-truss (FBBCz), Octet-truss | Elastic modulus, yield strength | Structural analysis | – | mechanical properties | Not quantified | 14 |
| [34] | Hip femoral stem | Body-centered cubic (BCC) | Density | Implanted model | – | Stress shielding signal | Gruen zone 6: − 11%, Gruen zone 7: − 25% | 19 |
| [43] | Knee femoral component pegs | – | Porosity of geometrically optimized pegs | Implanted model | – | Stress in bone | Stress + 18.16% | 16 |
| [44] | Knee tibial component | Rhombic dodecahedron—fully porous stem | Pore size, porosity | Implanted model | – | Stress and strain energy in bone |
Stress + 64% Strain energy + 121% |
12 |
| [45] | Knee tibial component | Gyroid | Elastic modulus | Implanted model | – | Stress and strain energy in bone | Stress + 30%, strain energy + 91% | 14 |
| [38] | Shoulder humeral stem | Face-centered cubic (FCC) | Mass reduction | – | – | Elastic modulus | Not quantified | 14 |