Subject-specific finite element models implementing a maximum principal strain criterion are able to estimate failure risk and fracture location on human femurs tested in vitro

Journal of Biomechanics

Volumn 41, Issue 2, 2008, Pages 356-367

  Schileo, Enrico ^a   Taddei, Fulvia ^a   Cristofolini, Luca ^a,b   Viceconti, Marco ^a  

^a RIZZOLI ORTHOPAEDIC INSTITUTE   (Italy)

^b UNIVERSITY OF BOLOGNA   (Italy)

Author keywords

Bone biomechanics; Experimental validation; Failure criteria; In vitro failure tests; Maximum principal strain; Subject specific finite element models

Indexed keywords

BIOMECHANICS; COMPUTERIZED TOMOGRAPHY; FINITE ELEMENT METHOD; MATHEMATICAL MODELS; RISK ASSESSMENT;

BONE BIOMECHANICS; MAXIMUM PRINCIPAL STRAIN;

FRACTURE FIXATION;

ARTICLE; BONE EXAMINATION; BONE STRUCTURE; FEMUR; FEMUR FRACTURE; HUMAN; IMAGE ANALYSIS; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RISK ASSESSMENT;

AGED; AGED, 80 AND OVER; CADAVER; COMPUTER SIMULATION; DIAGNOSIS, COMPUTER-ASSISTED; ELASTICITY; FEMORAL FRACTURES; FINITE ELEMENT ANALYSIS; HUMANS; MALE; MODELS, BIOLOGICAL; RISK ASSESSMENT; STRESS, MECHANICAL;

EID: 38349060664     PISSN: 00219290     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.jbiomech.2007.09.009     Document Type: Article

References (47)

1. AJM, 1991. Osteoporosis Consensus Developement Conference, 1991.
2. Alho A., Husby T., and Hoiseth A. Bone mineral content and mechanical strength. An ex vivo study on human femora at autopsy. Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research 227 (1988) 292-297
3. Bayraktar H.H., Gupta A., Kwon R.Y., Papadopoulos P., and Keaveny T.M. The modified super-ellipsoid yield criterion for human trabecular bone. Journal of Biomechanical Engineering 126 (2004) 677-684
4. Bayraktar H.H., Morgan E.F., Niebur G.L., Morris G.E., Wong E.K., and Keaveny T.M. Comparison of the elastic and yield properties of human femoral trabecular and cortical bone tissue. Journal of Biomechanics 37 (2004) 27-35
5. Bell K.L., Loveridge N., Power J., Garrahan N., Meggitt B.F., and Reeve J. Regional differences in cortical porosity in the fractured femoral neck. Bone 24 (1999) 57-64
6. Besl P., and McKay N. A method for registration of 3-D shapes. IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence 14 (1992) 239-256
7. Carter D.R., and Hayes W.C. The compressive behavior of bone as a two-phase porous structure. The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery 59 (1977) 954-962
8. Chang W.C., Christensen T.M., Pinilla T.P., and Keaveny T.M. Uniaxial yield strains for bovine trabecular bone are isotropic and asymmetric. Journal of Orthopaedic Research 17 (1999) 582-585
9. Cody D.D., Gross GaryJ., J. Hou F., Spencer H.J., Goldstein S.A., and P. Fyhrie D. Femoral strength is better predicted by finite element models than QCT and DXA. Journal of Biomechanics 32 (1999) 1013-1020
10. Cody D.D., Hou F.J., Divine G.W., and Fyhrie D.P. Short term in vivo precision of proximal femoral finite element modeling. Annals of Biomedical Engineering 28 (2000) 408-414
11. Cowin S.C., and He Q.C. Tensile and compressive stress yield criteria for cancellous bone. Journal of Biomechanics 38 (2005) 141-144
12. Crawford R.P., Cann C.E., and Keaveny T.M. Finite element models predict in vitro vertebral body compressive strength better than quantitative computed tomography. Bone 33 (2003) 744-750
13. Cristofolini L., Juszczyk M., Martelli S., Taddei F., and Viceconti M. In vitro replication of spontaneous fractures of the proximal human femur. Journal of Biomechanics 12 (2007) (e-pub ahead of print)
14. Currey J.D. Tensile yield in compact bone is determined by strain, post-yield behaviour by mineral content. Journal of Biomechanics 37 (2004) 549-556
15. Evans F.G. Mechanical Properties of Bone (1973), Charles C. Thomas Publishers, Springfield, IL, USA
16. Ford C.M., Keaveny T.M., and Hayes W.C. The effect of impact direction on the structural capacity of the proximal femur during falls. Journal of Bone and Mineral Research: The Official Journal of the American Society for Bone and Mineral Research 11 (1996) 377-383
17. Gomez-Benito M.J., Garcia-Aznar J.M., and Doblare M. Finite element prediction of proximal femoral fracture patterns under different loads. Journal of Biomechanical Engineering 127 (2005) 9-14
18. Goulet R.W., Goldstein S.A., Ciarelli M.J., Kuhn J.L., Brown M.B., and Feldkamp L.A. The relationship between the structural and orthogonal compressive properties of trabecular bone. Journal of Biomechanics 27 (1994) 375-389
19. Kalender W.A. A phantom for standardization and quality control in spinal bone mineral measurements by QCT and DXA: design considerations and specifications. Medical Physics 19 (1992) 583-586
20. Keaveny T.M., Morgan E.F., Niebur G.L., and Yeh O.C. Biomechanics of trabecular bone. Annual Review of Biomedical Engineering 3 (2001) 307-333
21. Keyak J.H. Improved prediction of proximal femoral fracture load using nonlinear finite element models. Medical Engineering and Physics 23 (2001) 165-173
22. Keyak J.H., and Rossi S.A. Prediction of femoral fracture load using finite element models: an examination of stress- and strain-based failure theories. Journal of Biomechanics 33 (2000) 209-214
23. Keyak J.H., Lee I.Y., and Skinner H.B. Correlations between orthogonal mechanical properties and density of trabecular bone: use of different densitometric measures. Journal of Biomedical Materials Research 28 (1994) 1329-1336
24. Keyak J.H., Rossi S.A., Jones K.A., and Skinner H.B. Prediction of femoral fracture load using automated finite element modeling. Journal of Biomechanics 31 (1998) 125-133
25. Keyak J.H., Kaneko T.S., Tehranzadeh J., and Skinner H.B. Predicting proximal femoral strength using structural engineering models. Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research (2005) 219-228
26. Kopperdahl D.L., and Keaveny T.M. Yield strain behavior of trabecular bone. Journal of Biomechanics 31 (1998) 601-608
27. Link T.M., Vieth V., Langenberg R., Meier N., Lotter A., Newitt D., and Majumdar S. Structure analysis of high resolution magnetic resonance imaging of the proximal femur: in vitro correlation with biomechanical strength and BMD. Calcified Tissue International 72 (2003) 156-165
28. Lotz J.C., Cheal E.J., and Hayes W.C. Fracture prediction for the proximal femur using finite element models: Part I-Linear analysis. Journal of Biomechanical Engineering 113 (1991) 353-360
29. Lotz J.C., Cheal E.J., and Hayes W.C. Fracture prediction for the proximal femur using finite element models: Part II-Nonlinear analysis. Journal of Biomechanical Engineering 113 (1991) 361-365
30. Morgan E.F., and Keaveny T.M. Dependence of yield strain of human trabecular bone on anatomic site. Journal of Biomechanics 34 (2001) 569-577
31. Morgan E.F., Bayraktar H.H., and Keaveny T.M. Trabecular bone modulus-density relationships depend on anatomic site. Journal of Biomechanics 36 (2003) 897-904
32. Nalla R.K., Kinney J.H., and Ritchie R.O. Mechanistic fracture criteria for the failure of human cortical bone. Nature Materials 2 (2003) 164-168
33. Niebur G.L., Feldstein M.J., Yuen J.C., Chen T.J., and Keaveny T.M. High-resolution finite element models with tissue strength asymmetry accurately predict failure of trabecular bone. Journal of Biomechanics 33 (2000) 1575-1583
34. Oden Z.M., Selvitelli D.M., and Bouxsein M.L. Effect of local density changes on the failure load of the proximal femur. Journal of Orthopaedic Research: Official Publication of the Orthopaedic Research Society 17 (1999) 661-667
35. Ota T., Yamamoto I., and Morita R. Fracture simulation of the femoral bone using the finite-element method: how a fracture initiates and proceeds. Journal of Bone and Mineral Metabolism 17 (1999) 108-112
36. Peng L., Bai J., Zeng X., 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
37. Pietruszczak S., Inglis D., and Pande G.N. A fabric-dependent fracture criterion for bone. Journal of Biomechanics 32 (1999) 1071-1079
38. Schileo E., Taddei F., Malandrino A., Cristofolini L., and Viceconti M. Subject-specific finite element models can accurately predict strain levels in long bones. Journal of Biomechanics (2007) (e-pub ahead of print)
39. Taddei F., Viceconti M., Manfrini M., and Toni A. Mechanical strength of a femoral reconstruction in paediatric oncology: a finite element study. Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers [H] 217 (2003) 111-119
40. Taddei F., Cristofolini L., Martelli S., Gill H.S., 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
41. 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 (2007) 973-979
42. Taylor D. Fracture mechanics: How does bone break?. Nature Materials 2 (2003) 133-134
43. Testi D., Viceconti M., Cappello A., and Gnudi S. Prediction of hip fracture can be significantly improved by a single biomedical indicator. Annals of Biomedical Engineering 30 (2002) 801-807
44. Viceconti M., Olsen S., Nolte L.P., and Burton K. Extracting clinically relevant data from finite element simulations. Clinical Biomechanics (Bristol, Avon) 20 (2005) 451-454
45. Viceconti M., Zannoni C., Testi D., Petrone M., Perticoni S., Quadrani P., Taddei F., Imboden S., and Clapworthy G. The multimod application framework: a rapid application development tool for computer aided medicine. Computer Methods and Programs in Biomedicine 85 (2007) 138-151
46. Wirtz D.C., 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
47. Yang K.-H., Shen K.L., Demetropoulos C.K., King A.I., Kolodziej P., Levine R.S., and Fitzgerald R.H.J. The relationship between loading conditions and fracture patterns of the proximal femur. Journal of Biomechanical Engineering 118 (1996) 575-578