['Femoral bone remodeling in response to stress shielding induces periprosthetic bone loss. Computerized finite element analysis (FEA) is employed to demonstrate differences in initial stress distribution. However, FEA is often performed without considering the precise sites at which the stem was fixed. We determined whether FEA reflects mid-term radiological examination exactly as predicted following long-term stress shielding.', 'Femur-stem fixation sites were evaluated radiologically according to the location of spot welds in two anatomical cementless stem designs. Based on mid-term radiological results, four femur-stem bonding site conditions were defined as: (Condition A) no bonding; (Condition B) bonding within the 10\xa0mm area proximal to the distal border of the porous area; (Condition C) bonding of the entire porous area; and (Condition D) bonding of the entire femoral stem, prior to conducting FEA analysis. Furthermore, we radiographically evaluated mid- and long-term stress shielding, and measured bone mineral density of the femur 10\xa0years after total hip arthroplasty.', 'Spot welds appeared frequently around the border between the porous and smooth areas. FEA showed that, based on mid-term radiological evaluation, von Mises stress was reduced in condition B in the area proximal to the femur-stem bonding sites for both stem designs compared with condition A (no bonding). Conversely, von Mises stress at all areas of the femur-stem bonding sites in conditions C and D was higher than that in condition A. With respect to stress shielding progression, there was no significant difference between the two types of stem designs. However, stress shielding progressed and was significantly higher in the presence of spot welds (p\u2009=\u20090.001). In both stem designs, bone mineral density in zone VII was significantly lower than that in the contralateral hips.'] Does finite element analysis of cementless femoral stem based on mid- and long-term radiological evaluation?