Reliable simulations of the human proximal femur by high-order finite element analysis validated by experimental observations

Journal of Biomechanics

Volumn 40, Issue 16, 2007, Pages 3688-3699

  Yosibash, Zohar ^a   Trabelsi, Nir ^a   Milgrom, Charles ^b  

^a BEN GURION UNIVERSITY OF THE NEGEV   (Israel)

^b HADASSAH HEBREW UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER   (Israel)

Author keywords

Bone biomechanics; Computed tomography; Finite element analysis; p FEM; Proximal femur

Indexed keywords

BIOMECHANICS; COMPUTER SIMULATION; COMPUTERIZED TOMOGRAPHY; FINITE ELEMENT METHOD; ORTHOPEDICS;

BONE BIOMECHANICS; P-FEM; PROXIMAL FEMUR;

PROSTHETICS;

ADULT; ANISOTROPY; ARTICLE; BIOMECHANICS; BONE STRENGTH; COMPUTER ASSISTED TOMOGRAPHY; FEMALE; FEMUR; FINITE ELEMENT ANALYSIS; GEOMETRY; HUMAN; HUMAN TISSUE; IN VITRO STUDY; LOADING TEST; LONG BONE; MATERIAL STATE; MODEL; PRIORITY JOURNAL; QUANTITATIVE ANALYSIS; VISCOELASTICITY; YOUNG MODULUS;

ADULT; BONE DENSITY; COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH; COMPUTER SIMULATION; ELASTICITY; FEMALE; FEMUR HEAD; FINITE ELEMENT ANALYSIS; HUMANS; MODELS, BIOLOGICAL; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; STRESS, MECHANICAL; TENSILE STRENGTH;

EID: 36248997736     PISSN: 00219290     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.jbiomech.2007.06.017     Document Type: Article

References (34)

1. Alho A., Husby T., and Hoiseth A. Bone mineral content and mechanical strength. An ex-vivo study on human femora and autopsy. Clinical Orthopaedics 227 (1988) 292-297
2. Bayraktar, H., Morgan, E., Nieber, G.L., Morris, G., Wong, E., Keaveny, M., 2004. Comparison of the elastic and yield properties of human femoral trabecular and cortical bone tissue. Journal of Biomechanics 37, 27-35.
3. Bessho M., Ohnishi I., Matsuyama J., Matsumoto T., Imai K., and Nakamura K. Prediction of strength and strain of the proximal femur by a CT-based finite element method. Journal of Biomechanics 40 8 (2007) 1745-1753
4. Cann C. Quantitative CT for determination of bone mineral density: a review. Radiology 166 (1988) 509-522
5. Carter D., and Hayes W. The compressive behavior of bone as a two-phase porous structure. Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery-American Volume 59 (1977) 954-962
6. Cody D., Gross G., Hou F., Spencer H., Goldstein S., and Fyhrie D. Femoral strength is better predicted by finite element models than QCT and DXA. Journal of Biomechanics 32 (1999) 1013-1020
7. Cody D., Hou F.J., Divine G.W., and Fyhrie D.P. Short term in vivo study of proximal femoral finite element modeling. Annals Biomedical Engineering 28 (2000) 408-414
8. Couteau B., Payan Y., and Lavallee S. The mesh-matching algorithm: an automatic 3d mesh generator for finite element structures. Journal of Biomechanics 33 (2000) 1005-1009
9. Cowin S., and Ashby M. Bone Mechanics Handbook (2001), CRC Press, Boca Raton
10. Esses S., Lotz J., and Hayes W. Biomechanical properties of the proximal femur determined in vitro by single-energy quantitative computed tomography. Journal of Bone and Mineral Research 4 (1989) 715-722
11. Heismann B., Leppert J., and Stierstorfer K. Density and atomic number measurements with spectral X-ray attenuation method. Journal of Applied Physics 94 (2003) 2073-2079
12. Jensen J. A photoelastic study of a model of the proximal femur. A biomechanical study of unstable trochanteric fractures I. Acta Orthopaedica Scandinavica 49 1 (1978) 54-59
13. Keaveny T., Guo E., Wachtel E., McMahon T., and Hayes W. Trabecular bone exhibits fully linear elastic behavior and yields at low strains. Journal of Biomechanics 27 (1994) 1127-1136
14. Keller T. Predicting the compressive mechanical behavior of bone. Journal of Biomechanics 27 (1994) 1159-1168
15. Kenney J., and Keeping E. Mathematics of Statistics (1962), Van Nostrand, Princeton, NJ
16. Keyak J., and Falkinstein Y. Comparison of in situ and in vitro CT scan-based finite element model predictions of proximal femoral fracture load. Medical Engineering and Physics 25 (2003) 781-787
17. Keyak J., Fourkas M., Meagher J., and Skinner H. Validation of automated method of three-dimensional finite element modelling of bone. ASME Journal of Biomechanical Engineering 15 (1993) 505-509
18. Keyak J., Meagher J., Skinner H., and Mote J. Automated three-dimensional finite element modelling of bone: a new method. ASME Journal of Biomechanical Engineering 12 (1990) 389-397
19. Linde F., Norgaard P., Hvid I., Odgaard A., and Soballe K. Mechanical properties of trabecular bone: dependency on strain rate. Journal of Biomechanics 24 9 (1991) 803-809
20. Lotz J., Gerhart T., and Hayes W. Mechanical properties of trabecular bone from the proximal femur: a quantitative CT study. Journal of Computer Assisted Tomography 14 1 (1990) 107-114
21. Lotz J., Cheal E., and Hayes W. Fracture prediction for the proximal femur using finite element models: Part 1- linear analysis. ASME Journal of Biomechanical Engineering 113 (1991) 353-360
22. Lotz J., Gerhart T., and Hayes W. Mechanical properties of metaphyseal bone in the proximal femur. Journal of Biomechanics 24 (1991) 317-329
23. Mertz B., Niederer P., Muller R., and Ruegsegger P. Automated finite element analysis of excised human femura based on precision-QCT. ASME Journal of Biomechanical Engineering 118 (1996) 387-390
24. Peng L., Bai J., Zeng Z., and Zhou Y. Comparison of isotropic and orthotropic material property assignments on femoral finite element models under two loading conditions. Medical Engineering and Physics 28 (2006) 227-233
25. San Antonio, T., Araque, E., Casanova, E., Muller-Karger, C.M., 2005. Sensitivity analysis of heterogeneous mechanical properties of a bone model. In: Rodrigues, H.e.a. (Ed.), Proceedings of ICCB05- III International conference on computational bioengineering (Lisbon, Portugal), vol. 1. IST press, pp. 209-220.
26. Shahar R., Zaslansky P., Barak M., Friesem A., Currey J., and Weiner S. Anisotropic Poisson's ratio and compression modulus of cortical bone determined by speckle interferometry. Journal of Biomechanics 40 (2007) 252-264
27. Szabó B.A., and Babuška I. Finite Element Analysis (1991), Wiley, New York
28. Taddei F., Pancanti A., and Viceconti M. An improved method for the automatic mapping of computed tomography numbers onto finite element models. Medical Engineering and Physics 26 (2004) 61-69
29. Taddei F., Cristofolini L., Martelli S., Gill H., and Viceconti M. Subject-specific finite element models of long bones: an in vitro evaluation of the overall accuracy. Journal of Biomechanics 39 (2006) 2457-2467
30. Taddei F., Schileo E., Helgason B., Cristofolini L., and Viceconti M. The material mapping strategy influences the accuracy of CT-based finite element models of bones: an evaluation against experimental measurements. Medical Engineering and Physics 29 9 (2007) 973-979
31. Viceconti M., Bellingeri L., Cristofolini L., and Toni A. A comparative study on different methods of automatic mesh generation of human femurs. Medical Engineering and Physics 20 (1998) 1-10
32. Viceconti M., Davinelli M., Taddei F., and Cappello A. Automatic generation of accurate subject-specific bone finite element models to be used in clinical studies. Journal of Biomechanics 37 (2004) 1597-1605
33. Wirtz D., Schiffers N., Pandorf T., Radermacher K., Weichert D., and Forst R. Critical evaluation of known bone material properties to realize anisotropic FE-simulation of the proximal femur. Journal of Biomechanics 33 (2000) 1325-1330
34. Yosibash Z., Padan R., Joscowicz L., and Milgrom C. A CT-based high-order finite element analysis of the human proximal femur compared to in-vitro experiments. ASME Journal of Biomechanical Engineering 129 3 (2007) 297-309