Literature DB >> 14519351

Comparison of in situ and in vitro CT scan-based finite element model predictions of proximal femoral fracture load.

Joyce H Keyak1, Yuri Falkinstein.   

Abstract

Hip fracture is a serious and common injury that can lead to permanent disability, pneumonia, pulmonary embolism, and death. Research to help prevent these fractures is essential. Computed tomographic (CT) scan-based finite element (FE) modeling is a tool that can predict proximal femoral fracture loads in vitro. Because this tool might be used in vivo, this study examined whether FE models generated from CT scans in situ and in vitro yield comparable predictions of proximal femoral fracture load. CT scans of the left proximal femur of two human cadavers were obtained in situ and in vitro, and three-dimensional FE models employing nonlinear mechanical properties were generated from each CT scan. The models were evaluated under single-limb stance-type loading by applying displacements incrementally to the femoral head. The FE-predicted fracture load (F(FE)) was the maximum femoral head reaction force. F(FE) for the in situ-derived models for the two subjects were 5.2 and 13.3% greater than for the in vitro-derived models. These results demonstrate that using CT scan data obtained in situ instead of in vitro to generate FE models can lead to substantially different predicted fracture loads. This effect must be considered when using this technology in vivo.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2003        PMID: 14519351     DOI: 10.1016/s1350-4533(03)00081-x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Med Eng Phys        ISSN: 1350-4533            Impact factor:   2.242


  25 in total

Review 1.  Advanced CT based in vivo methods for the assessment of bone density, structure, and strength.

Authors:  K Engelke; C Libanati; T Fuerst; P Zysset; H K Genant
Journal:  Curr Osteoporos Rep       Date:  2013-09       Impact factor: 5.096

2.  QCT-based failure analysis of proximal femurs under various loading orientations.

Authors:  Majid Mirzaei; Maziyar Keshavarzian; Fatemeh Alavi; Pegah Amiri; Saeid Samiezadeh
Journal:  Med Biol Eng Comput       Date:  2015-03-03       Impact factor: 2.602

Review 3.  The paradox of Wolff's theories.

Authors:  A Hammer
Journal:  Ir J Med Sci       Date:  2014-01-29       Impact factor: 1.568

4.  MDCT-based Finite Element Analysis of Vertebral Fracture Risk: What Dose is Needed?

Authors:  D Anitha; Kai Mei; Michael Dieckmeyer; Felix K Kopp; Nico Sollmann; Claus Zimmer; Jan S Kirschke; Peter B Noel; Thomas Baum; Karupppasamy Subburaj
Journal:  Clin Neuroradiol       Date:  2018-08-21       Impact factor: 3.649

Review 5.  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

Review 6.  Advances in bone imaging for osteoporosis.

Authors:  Judith E Adams
Journal:  Nat Rev Endocrinol       Date:  2013-01       Impact factor: 43.330

7.  Modelling of bone fracture and strength at different length scales: a review.

Authors:  Fereshteh A Sabet; Ahmad Raeisi Najafi; Elham Hamed; Iwona Jasiuk
Journal:  Interface Focus       Date:  2016-02-06       Impact factor: 3.906

8.  Differences in hip quantitative computed tomography (QCT) measurements of bone mineral density and bone strength between glucocorticoid-treated and glucocorticoid-naive postmenopausal women.

Authors:  Kuo-Chiang Lian; Thomas F Lang; Joyce H Keyak; Gunnard W Modin; Qaisar Rehman; Loi Do; Nancy E Lane
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2004-09-28       Impact factor: 4.507

Review 9.  Osteoporosis drug effects on cortical and trabecular bone microstructure: a review of HR-pQCT analyses.

Authors:  Eric Lespessailles; Ridha Hambli; Serge Ferrari
Journal:  Bonekey Rep       Date:  2016-08-31

10.  Automated 3D trabecular bone structure analysis of the proximal femur--prediction of biomechanical strength by CT and DXA.

Authors:  T Baum; J Carballido-Gamio; M B Huber; D Müller; R Monetti; C Räth; F Eckstein; E M Lochmüller; S Majumdar; E J Rummeny; T M Link; J S Bauer
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2009-10-27       Impact factor: 4.507

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.