How do changes to plate thickness, length, and face-connectivity affect femoral cancellous bone’s density and surface area? An investigation using regular cellular models

Journal of Biomechanics

Volumn 33, Issue 3, 2000, Pages 327-335

  Anderson, Iain A ^a   Carman, John B ^b  

^a CALLAGHAN INNOVATION   (New Zealand)

^b UNIVERSITY OF AUCKLAND   (New Zealand)

Author keywords

Bone architecture; Cancellous bone; Femoral head; Regular models

Indexed keywords

AGED; ANISOTROPY; ARTICLE; BONE DENSITY; BONE PLATE; BONE STRUCTURE; CANCELLOUS BONE; CONTROLLED STUDY; FEMALE; FEMUR; FEMUR HEAD; HUMAN; HUMAN TISSUE; MALE; MODEL; PRIORITY JOURNAL; SURFACE PROPERTY; THICKNESS;

AGED; AGED, 80 AND OVER; BONE DENSITY; CADAVER; COMPUTER SIMULATION; FEMALE; FEMUR; GROWTH PLATE; HUMANS; MALE; MODELS, BIOLOGICAL;

BONE; DEFORMATION; DENSITY (SPECIFIC GRAVITY); PHYSIOLOGICAL MODELS; SURFACE PROPERTIES;

BONE DENSITY; CANCELLOUS BONES;

BIOMECHANICS;

EID: 0033622799     PISSN: 00219290     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S0021-9290(99)00200-6     Document Type: Article

References (23)

1. Anderson, I.A., Carman, J.B., 1997. The calculated state of stress and strain in the femoral head: effects of material symmetry assumptions. Transactions of the 43rd Annual Meeting Orthopedic Research Society p. 551.
2. Anderson, I.A., Carman, J.B., Hunter, P.J.H., 1996. Material constants for cancellous bone derived from cellular finite element models. In: Van der Sloten, J., Lowet, G., Van Audekercke, R., Van Der Perre, G. (Eds.), Proceedings of the 10th Conference of the European Society of Biomechanics, Leuven, Belgium, p. 208.
3. Beaupré G.S., Hayes W.C. Finite element analysis of a three-dimensional open-celled model for trabecular bone. Journal of Biomechanical Engineering. 107:1985;249-256.
4. Fazzalari N.L., Crisp D.J., Vernon-Roberts B. Mathematical modelling of trabecular bone structure: the evaluation of analytical and quantified surface to volume relationships in the femoral head and iliac crest. Journal of Biomechanics. 22:1989;901-910.
5. Garden R.S. The structure and function of the proximal end of the femur. Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery. 43B:1961;576-589.
6. Gibson L.J. The mechanical behaviour of cancellous bone. Journal of Biomechanics. 18:1985;317-328.
7. Gibson L.J., Ashby M.F. Cellular solids. 1988;Pergamon Press, Oxford, UK.
8. Goulet R.W., Goldstein S.A., Ciarelli M.J., Kuhn J.L., Brown M.B., Feldkamp L.A. The relationship between the structural and orthogonal compressive properties of trabecular bone. Journal of Biomechanics. 27:1994;375-389.
9. Hollister S.J., Fyhrie D.P., Jepsen K.J., Goldstein S.A. Application of homogenization theory to the study of trabecular bone mechanics. Journal of Biomechanics. 24:1991;825-839.
10. Keaveny T.M., Hayes W.C. A 20-year perspective on the mechanical properties of trabecular bone. Journal of Biomechanical Engineering. 115:1993;534-541.
11. Lozupone E., Favia A. The structure of the trabeculae of cancellous bone. 2. Long bones and mastoid. Calcified Tissue International. 46:1990;367-372.
12. Majumdar S., Kothari M., Augat P., Newitt D.C., Link T.M., Lin J.C., Lang T., Lu Y., Genant H.K. High-resolution magnetic resonance imaging. three-dimensional trabecular bone architecture and biomechanical properties Bone. 22(5):1998;445-454.
13. Martin R.B. Porosity and specific surface of bone. CRC Critical Reviews biomedical Engineering. 10:1984;179-222.
14. Mullender M.G., Huiskes R. Proposal for the regulatory mechanism of Wolff’s Law. Journal of Orthopedic Research. 14:1995;972-979.
15. Parfitt A.M., Drezner M.K., Glorieux F.H., Kanis J.A., Malluche H., Meunier P.J., Ott S.M., Recker R.R. Bone histomorphometry. standardization of nomenclature, symbols, and units. Report of the ASBMR Histomorphometry Nomenclature Committee Journal of Bone and Mineral Research. 2:1987;595-610.
16. Parfitt A.M., Mathews C.H.E., Villanueva A.R., Kleerekoper M., Frame B., Rao D.S. Relationships between surface, volume, and thickness of iliac trabecular bone in aging and in osteoporosis. implications for the microanatomic and cellular mechanisms of bone loss Journal of Clinical Investigation. 72:1983;1396-1409.
17. Pauwels, F., 1980. Biomechanics of the locomotor apparatus (Translation from German edition 1965), Springer, Berlin.
18. Singh I. The architecture of cancellous bone. Journal of Anatomy. 127:1978;305-310.
19. Snyder, B.D., 1991. Anisotropic structure-property relations for trabecular bone: an analysis of the morphological and constitutive properties of trabecular bone, PhD. Thesis, Univ. of Penn.
20. Thomson W.T. On the division of space with minimum partitional area. Philosophical Magzine. 24:1887;503-514.
21. Wenzel, T.E., Fyhrie, D.P., Schaffler M.B., Goldstein, S.A., 1998. Variations in the three-dimensional cancellous architecture of the proximal femur in hip fracture patients and controls. Transactions of the 44th Annual meeting Orthopedic Research Society, p. 86.
22. Whitehouse W.J. The quantitative morphology of anisotropic trabecular bone. Journal of Microscopy. 101:1974;153-168.
23. Whitehouse W.J., Dyson E.D. Scanning electron microscope studies of trabecular bone in the proximal end of the human femur. Journal of Anatomy. 118:1974;417-444.