Noninvasive prediction of vertebral body compressive strength using nonlinear finite element method and an image based technique

Physica Medica

Volumn 26, Issue 2, 2010, Pages 88-97

  Zeinali, Ahad ^a,b   Hashemi, Bijan ^b   Akhlaghpoor, Shahram ^c  

^a URMIA UNIVERSITY OF MEDICAL SCIENCES   (Iran)

^b TARBIAT MODARES UNIVERSITY   (Iran)

^c UNIVERSITY OF TEHRAN   (Iran)

Author keywords

Compressive strength; Finite element method; Human vertebra; Quantitative computed tomography

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; CADAVER; COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH; COMPUTER ASSISTED TOMOGRAPHY; CORRELATION COEFFICIENT; FINITE ELEMENT ANALYSIS; HUMAN; HUMAN TISSUE; IMAGE ANALYSIS; NON INVASIVE MEASUREMENT; PREDICTION; TRABECULAR BONE; VERTEBRA BODY;

ADULT; ALGORITHMS; COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH; ELASTICITY; FINITE ELEMENT ANALYSIS; HUMANS; LINEAR MODELS; LUMBAR VERTEBRAE; MODELS, BIOLOGICAL; NONLINEAR DYNAMICS; PHANTOMS, IMAGING; THORACIC VERTEBRAE; TOMOGRAPHY, X-RAY COMPUTED;

EID: 77949659209     PISSN: 11201797     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.ejmp.2009.08.002     Document Type: Article

References (22)

1. Riggs B.L., Melton L.J. The worldwide problem of osteoporosis: insights afforded by epidemiology. Bone 1995, 17(5):505-511.
2. Cheng X.G., Nichelson P.H., Boonen S., Lowet G., Brys P., Aerssens J., et al. Prediction of vertebral strength in vitro by spinal bone densitometry and calcaneal ultrasound. J Bone Miner Res 1997, 12(10):1721-1728.
3. Singer K., Edmondstone S., Day R., Breidahl P., Price R. Prediction of thoracic and lumbar vertebral body compressive strength: correlations with bone mineral density and vertebral region. Bone 1995, 17(2):167-174.
4. Edmondson S.J., Singer K.P., Day R.E., Price R.I., Breidahl P.D. Ex vivo estimation of thoracolumbar vertebral body compressive strength: the relative contributions of bone densitometry and vertebral morphometry. Osteoporos Int 1997, 7(2):142-148.
5. Ebbesen E.N., Thomson J.S., Beck-Nielson H., Nepper-Rasmussen H.J., Mosekilde L. Vertebral bone density evaluated by dual-energy X-ray absorbtiometry and quantitative computed tomography in vitro. Bone 1998, 23(3):283-290.
6. Diamant I., Shahar R., Masharawi Y., Gefen A. A method for patient-specific evaluation of vertebral cancellous bone strength: in vitro validation. Clin Biomech 2007, 22(6):282-291.
7. Diamant I., Shahar R., Gefen A. How to select the elastic modulus for cancellous bone in patient-specific continuum models of the spine?. Med Biol Eng Comput 2005, 43(4):465-472.
8. Mittra E., Rubin C., Qin Y.X. Interrelationship of trabecular mechanical and microstructural properties in sheep trabecular bone. J Biomech 2005, 38(6):1229-1237.
9. Liebschner M.A.K., Kopperdahl D.L., Rosenberg W.S., Keaveny T.M. Finite element modeling of the human thoracolumbar spine. Spine 2003, 28(6):559-565.
10. Crawford R.P., Cann C.E., Keaveny T.M. Finite element models predict in vitro vertebral body compressive strength better than quantitative computed tomography. Bone 2003, 33(4):744-750.
11. Silva M.J., Keaveny T.M., Hayes W.C. Computed tomography-based finite element analysis predicts failure loads and fracture patterns. J Orthop Res 1998, 16(3):300-308.
12. Buckley J.M., Loo K., Motherway J. Comparison of quantitative computed tomography-based measures in predicting vertebral compressive strength. Bone 2007, 40(3):767-774.
13. Imai K., Ohnishi I., Bessho M., Nakamura K. Nonlinear finite element model predicts vertebral bone strength and fracture site. Spine 2006, 31(16):1789-1794.
14. Buckley J.M., Cheng L., Loo K., Slyfield C., Zheng X. Quantitative computed tomography-based predictions of vertebral strength in anterior bending. Spine 2007, 32(8):1019-1027.
15. Crawford R.P., Rosenberg W.S., Keaveny T.M. Quantitative computed tomography-based finite element models of the human lumbar vertebral body: effect of element size on stiffness, damage, and fracture strength predictions. J Biomech Eng 2003, 125(4):434-438.
16. Mitton D., Cendre E., Roux J.P., Arlot M.E., Peix G., Rumelhart C., et al. Mechanical properties of ewe vertebral cancellous bone compared with histomorphometry and high-resolution computed tomography parameters. Bone 1998, 22(6):651-658.
17. Kopperdahl D.L., Morgan E.F., Keaveny T.M. Quantitative computed tomography estimates of the mechanical properties of human vertebral trabecular bone. J Orthop Res 2002, 20(4):801-805.
18. Kopperdahl D.L., Keaveny T.M. Yield strain behavior of trabecular bone. J Biomech 1998, 31(7):601-608.
19. Morgan E.F., Keaveny T.M. Dependence of yield strain of human trabecular bone on anatomic site. J Biomech 2001, 34(5):569-577.
20. Morgan Elise F., Bayraktar Harun H., Keaveny Tony M. Trabecular bone modulus-density relationships depend on anatomic site. J Biomech 2003, 36(7):897-904.
21. Silva M.J., Wang C., Keaveny T.M., Hayes W.C. Direct and computed tomography thickness measurements of the human lumbar vertebral shell and endplate. Bone 1994, 15(4):409-414.
22. Shin C.C., Jun S., Hansheng W. Sample size calculations in clinical research 2008, Chapman & Hall, Boca Raton, FL. 2nd ed.