Literature DB >> 12674319

How well are bones designed to resist fracture?

John D Currey1.   

Abstract

Because bone is obviously in some way adapted to the loads falling on it and because fracture is usually the failure of mechanical competence of main clinical importance, it is often thought that bones are adapted to resist fracture. In this perspective, I consider that this may not be the case. Bones may be designed to be very stiff, and therefore highly mineralized, and therefore brittle; they may be adapted to normal loads, but not to the characteristic loads occurring in falls, or may be very poorly designed to stop cracks traveling once they have started. Bones may also potentially fail in completely contrasting modes, and therefore their design has to be a compromise that does not resist either mode completely successfully. The greatly differing fracture incidences in different bones seen in pre-senile adults suggest that safety factors have been adapted, over evolutionary time, to produce the best compromise for a host of different design constraints.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2003        PMID: 12674319     DOI: 10.1359/jbmr.2003.18.4.591

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Bone Miner Res        ISSN: 0884-0431            Impact factor:   6.741


  37 in total

1.  Combination of bone mineral density and upper femur geometry improves the prediction of hip fracture.

Authors:  Pasi Pulkkinen; Juha Partanen; Pekka Jalovaara; Timo Jämsä
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2004-02-03       Impact factor: 4.507

2.  Targeted exercises against hip fragility.

Authors:  R Nikander; P Kannus; P Dastidar; M Hannula; L Harrison; T Cervinka; N G Narra; R Aktour; T Arola; H Eskola; S Soimakallio; A Heinonen; J Hyttinen; H Sievänen
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2008-11-11       Impact factor: 4.507

3.  Finite element analysis of bone strength in osteogenesis imperfecta.

Authors:  Peter Varga; Bettina M Willie; Chris Stephan; Kenneth M Kozloff; Philippe K Zysset
Journal:  Bone       Date:  2020-01-22       Impact factor: 4.398

4.  Cross-sectional geometry of weight-bearing tibia in female athletes subjected to different exercise loadings.

Authors:  R Nikander; P Kannus; T Rantalainen; K Uusi-Rasi; A Heinonen; H Sievänen
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2009-11-17       Impact factor: 4.507

5.  Impaired vibration of auditory ossicles in osteopetrotic mice.

Authors:  Sho Kanzaki; Yasunari Takada; Shumpei Niida; Yoshihiro Takeda; Nobuyuki Udagawa; Kaoru Ogawa; Nobuhito Nango; Atsushi Momose; Koichi Matsuo
Journal:  Am J Pathol       Date:  2011-03       Impact factor: 4.307

Review 6.  Aging and the muscle-bone relationship.

Authors:  Susan A Novotny; Gordon L Warren; Mark W Hamrick
Journal:  Physiology (Bethesda)       Date:  2015-01

7.  New functional insights into the internal architecture of the laminated anchor spicules of Euplectella aspergillum.

Authors:  Michael A Monn; James C Weaver; Tianyang Zhang; Joanna Aizenberg; Haneesh Kesari
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2015-04-06       Impact factor: 11.205

8.  Mapping the natural variation in whole bone stiffness and strength across skeletal sites.

Authors:  Stephen H Schlecht; Erin M R Bigelow; Karl J Jepsen
Journal:  Bone       Date:  2014-07-02       Impact factor: 4.398

9.  Magnitude of loads influences the site of failure of highly curved bones.

Authors:  James Macione; Robert Sterling Nesbitt; Shiva Kotha
Journal:  J Mech Behav Biomed Mater       Date:  2013-12-02

10.  Exercise-induced metacarpophalangeal joint adaptation in the Thoroughbred racehorse.

Authors:  P Muir; A L Peterson; S J Sample; M C Scollay; M D Markel; V L Kalscheur
Journal:  J Anat       Date:  2008-12       Impact factor: 2.610

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.