Literature DB >> 10831755

Sensitivity of periprosthetic stress-shielding to load and the bone density-modulus relationship in subject-specific finite element models.

H Weinans1, D R Sumner, R Igloria, R N Natarajan.   

Abstract

Subject-specific finite element (FE) computer models of the proximal femur in hip replacement could potentially predict stress-shielding and subsequent bone loss in individual patients. Before such predictions can be made, it is important first to determine if between subject differences in stress-shielding are sensitive to poorly defined parameters such as the load and the bone material properties. In this study we investigate if subject-specific FE models provide consistent stress-shielding patterns in the bone, independent of the choice of the loading conditions and the bone density-modulus relationship used in the computer model. FE models of two right canine femurs with and without implants were constructed based on contiguous computed tomography (CT) scans so that subject-specific estimates of stress-shielding could be calculated. Four different loading conditions and two bone density-modulus relationships were tested. Stress-shielding was defined as the decrease of strain energy per gram bone mass in the femur with the implant in place relative to the intact femur. The analyses showed that for the four loading conditions and two bone density-modulus relationships the difference in stress-shielding between the two subjects was essentially constant (1% variation) when the same loading condition and density-modulus relationship was used for both subjects. The severity of stress-shielding within a subject was sensitive to these input parameters, varying up to 20% in specific regions with a change in loading conditions and up to 10% for a change in the assumed density-modulus relationship. We conclude that although the choice of input parameters can substantially affect stress-shielding in an individual, this choice had virtually no effect on the relative differences in femoral periprosthetic stress-shielding between individuals. Thus, while care should be taken in the interpretation of the absolute value of stress-shielding calculated with these type of models, subject-specific FE models may be useful for explaining the variation in bone adaptation responsiveness between different subjects in experimental or clinical studies.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2000        PMID: 10831755     DOI: 10.1016/s0021-9290(00)00036-1

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


  8 in total

1.  Radiograph-based femur morphing method.

Authors:  E M Zanetti; V Crupi; C Bignardi; P M Calderale
Journal:  Med Biol Eng Comput       Date:  2005-03       Impact factor: 2.602

Review 2.  Patient-Specific Bone Multiscale Modelling, Fracture Simulation and Risk Analysis-A Survey.

Authors:  Amadeus C S de Alcântara; Israel Assis; Daniel Prada; Konrad Mehle; Stefan Schwan; Lucia Costa-Paiva; Munir S Skaf; Luiz C Wrobel; Paulo Sollero
Journal:  Materials (Basel)       Date:  2019-12-24       Impact factor: 3.623

3.  Mechanical micromodeling of stress-shielding at the bone-implant interphase under shear loading.

Authors:  Yoann Hériveaux; Sophie Le Cann; Manon Fraulob; Elsa Vennat; Vu-Hieu Nguyen; Guillaume Haïat
Journal:  Med Biol Eng Comput       Date:  2022-09-28       Impact factor: 3.079

4.  Mathematical modeling and mechanical and histopathological testing of porous prosthetic pylon for direct skeletal attachment.

Authors:  Mark Pitkin; Grigory Raykhtsaum; John Pilling; Yuri Shukeylo; Vladimir Moxson; Volodimir Duz; John Lewandowski; Raymond Connolly; Robert S Kistenberg; John F Dalton; Boris Prilutsky; Stewart Jacobson
Journal:  J Rehabil Res Dev       Date:  2009

5.  A semi-automated method for hexahedral mesh construction of human vertebrae from CT scans.

Authors:  Yifei Dai; Glen L Niebur
Journal:  Comput Methods Biomech Biomed Engin       Date:  2009-10       Impact factor: 1.763

6.  Machine learning techniques for the optimization of joint replacements: Application to a short-stem hip implant.

Authors:  Myriam Cilla; Edoardo Borgiani; Javier Martínez; Georg N Duda; Sara Checa
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2017-09-05       Impact factor: 3.240

7.  Bone preserving level of osteotomy in short-stem total hip arthroplasty does not influence stress shielding dimensions - a comparing finite elements analysis.

Authors:  Rene Burchard; Sabrina Braas; Christian Soost; Jan Adriaan Graw; Jan Schmitt
Journal:  BMC Musculoskelet Disord       Date:  2017-08-07       Impact factor: 2.362

8.  Sensitivity of the stress field of the proximal femur predicted by CT-based FE analysis to modeling uncertainties.

Authors:  Sina Youssefian; Jarred A Bressner; Mikhail Osanov; James K Guest; Wojciech B Zbijewski; Adam S Levin
Journal:  J Orthop Res       Date:  2021-07-13       Impact factor: 3.102

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.