Literature DB >> 10653034

Prediction of femoral fracture load using finite element models: an examination of stress- and strain-based failure theories.

J H Keyak1, S A Rossi.   

Abstract

Finite element (FE) models are often used to model bone failure. However, no failure theory for bone has been validated at this time. In this study, we examined the performance of nine stress- and strain-based failure theories, six of which could account for differences in tensile and compressive material strengths. The distortion energy, Hoffman and a strain-based Hoffman analog, maximum normal stress, maximum normal strain, maximum shear strain, maximum shear stress (tau(max)), Coulomb-Mohr, and modified Mohr failure theories were evaluated using automatically generated, computed tomographic scan-based FE models of the femur. Eighteen matched pairs of proximal femora were examined in two load configurations, one approximating joint loading during single-limb stance and one simulating impact from a fall. Mechanical testing was performed to assess model and failure theory performance in the context of predicting femoral fracture load. Measured and FE-computed fracture load were significantly correlated for both loading conditions and all failure criteria (p < or = 0.001). The distortion energy and tau(max) failure theories were the most robust of those examined, providing the most consistently strong FE model performance for two very different loading conditions. The more complex failure theories and the strain-based theories examined did not improve performance over the simpler distortion energy and tau(max) theories, and often degraded performance, even when differences between tensile and compressive failure properties were represented. The relatively strong performance of the distortion energy and tau(max) theories supports the hypothesis that shear/distortion is an important failure mode during femoral fracture.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2000        PMID: 10653034     DOI: 10.1016/s0021-9290(99)00152-9

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Biomech        ISSN: 0021-9290            Impact factor:   2.712


  36 in total

1.  Number crunching: how and when will numerical models be used in the clinical setting?

Authors:  W Brent Edwards; Karen L Troy
Journal:  Curr Osteoporos Rep       Date:  2011-03       Impact factor: 5.096

2.  Voxel-based modeling and quantification of the proximal femur using inter-subject registration of quantitative CT images.

Authors:  Wenjun Li; Irina Kezele; D Louis Collins; Alex Zijdenbos; Joyce Keyak; John Kornak; Alain Koyama; Isra Saeed; Adrian Leblanc; Tamara Harris; Ying Lu; Thomas Lang
Journal:  Bone       Date:  2007-07-17       Impact factor: 4.398

3.  Effect of an UHMWPE patellar component on stress fields in the patella: a finite element analysis.

Authors:  Yeon Soo Lee; Thay Q Lee; Joyce H Keyak
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2008-10-01       Impact factor: 4.342

4.  Recent progress in bone imaging for osteoporosis research.

Authors:  Masako Ito
Journal:  J Bone Miner Metab       Date:  2011-02-08       Impact factor: 2.626

5.  Mechanical stress, fracture risk and beak evolution in Darwin's ground finches (Geospiza).

Authors:  Joris Soons; Anthony Herrel; Annelies Genbrugge; Peter Aerts; Jeffrey Podos; Dominique Adriaens; Yoni de Witte; Patric Jacobs; Joris Dirckx
Journal:  Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci       Date:  2010-04-12       Impact factor: 6.237

Review 6.  Biomechanics and mechanobiology of trabecular bone: a review.

Authors:  Ramin Oftadeh; Miguel Perez-Viloria; Juan C Villa-Camacho; Ashkan Vaziri; Ara Nazarian
Journal:  J Biomech Eng       Date:  2015-01       Impact factor: 2.097

7.  Mandible strength and geometry in relation to bite force: a study in three caviomorph rodents.

Authors:  Guido N Buezas; Federico Becerra; Alejandra I Echeverría; Adrián Cisilino; Aldo I Vassallo
Journal:  J Anat       Date:  2019-02-15       Impact factor: 2.610

8.  Are DXA/aBMD and QCT/FEA Stiffness and Strength Estimates Sensitive to Sex and Age?

Authors:  Asghar Rezaei; Hugo Giambini; Timothy Rossman; Kent D Carlson; Michael J Yaszemski; Lichun Lu; Dan Dragomir-Daescu
Journal:  Ann Biomed Eng       Date:  2017-09-22       Impact factor: 3.934

9.  The Biomechanics of Zygomatic Arch Shape.

Authors:  Amanda L Smith; Ian R Grosse
Journal:  Anat Rec (Hoboken)       Date:  2016-12       Impact factor: 2.064

10.  The feeding biomechanics and dietary ecology of Australopithecus africanus.

Authors:  David S Strait; Gerhard W Weber; Simon Neubauer; Janine Chalk; Brian G Richmond; Peter W Lucas; Mark A Spencer; Caitlin Schrein; Paul C Dechow; Callum F Ross; Ian R Grosse; Barth W Wright; Paul Constantino; Bernard A Wood; Brian Lawn; William L Hylander; Qian Wang; Craig Byron; Dennis E Slice; Amanda L Smith
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2009-02-02       Impact factor: 11.205

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.