Literature DB >> 27428281

Quantitative Computed Tomography Protocols Affect Material Mapping and Quantitative Computed Tomography-Based Finite-Element Analysis Predicted Stiffness.

Hugo Giambini, Dan Dragomir-Daescu, Ahmad Nassr, Michael J Yaszemski, Chunfeng Zhao.   

Abstract

Quantitative computed tomography-based finite-element analysis (QCT/FEA) has become increasingly popular in an attempt to understand and possibly reduce vertebral fracture risk. It is known that scanning acquisition settings affect Hounsfield units (HU) of the CT voxels. Material properties assignments in QCT/FEA, relating HU to Young's modulus, are performed by applying empirical equations. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effect of QCT scanning protocols on predicted stiffness values from finite-element models. One fresh frozen cadaveric torso and a QCT calibration phantom were scanned six times varying voltage and current and reconstructed to obtain a total of 12 sets of images. Five vertebrae from the torso were experimentally tested to obtain stiffness values. QCT/FEA models of the five vertebrae were developed for the 12 image data resulting in a total of 60 models. Predicted stiffness was compared to the experimental values. The highest percent difference in stiffness was approximately 480% (80 kVp, 110 mAs, U70), while the lowest outcome was ∼1% (80 kVp, 110 mAs, U30). There was a clear distinction between reconstruction kernels in predicted outcomes, whereas voltage did not present a clear influence on results. The potential of QCT/FEA as an improvement to conventional fracture risk prediction tools is well established. However, it is important to establish research protocols that can lead to results that can be translated to the clinical setting.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27428281      PMCID: PMC4967881          DOI: 10.1115/1.4034172

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Biomech Eng        ISSN: 0148-0731            Impact factor:   2.097


  21 in total

1.  The Effect of Quantitative Computed Tomography Acquisition Protocols on Bone Mineral Density Estimation.

Authors:  Hugo Giambini; Dan Dragomir-Daescu; Paul M Huddleston; Jon J Camp; Kai-Nan An; Ahmad Nassr
Journal:  J Biomech Eng       Date:  2015-11       Impact factor: 2.097

2.  Nonlinear finite element model predicts vertebral bone strength and fracture site.

Authors:  Kazuhiro Imai; Isao Ohnishi; Masahiko Bessho; Kozo Nakamura
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2006-07-15       Impact factor: 3.468

3.  Effect of specimen-specific anisotropic material properties in quantitative computed tomography-based finite element analysis of the vertebra.

Authors:  Ginu U Unnikrishnan; Glenn D Barest; David B Berry; Amira I Hussein; Elise F Morgan
Journal:  J Biomech Eng       Date:  2013-10-01       Impact factor: 2.097

4.  Relationships of clinical protocols and reconstruction kernels with image quality and radiation dose in a 128-slice CT scanner: study with an anthropomorphic and water phantom.

Authors:  Jijo Paul; B Krauss; R Banckwitz; W Maentele; R W Bauer; T J Vogl
Journal:  Eur J Radiol       Date:  2011-02-12       Impact factor: 3.528

5.  The unreliability of CT numbers as absolute values.

Authors:  C Levi; J E Gray; E C McCullough; R R Hattery
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  1982-09       Impact factor: 3.959

6.  Quantitative computed tomography-based finite element analysis predictions of femoral strength and stiffness depend on computed tomography settings.

Authors:  Dan Dragomir-Daescu; Christina Salas; Susheil Uthamaraj; Timothy Rossman
Journal:  J Biomech       Date:  2014-09-28       Impact factor: 2.712

7.  Novel anthropomorphic hip phantom corrects systemic interscanner differences in proximal femoral vBMD.

Authors:  S Bonaretti; R D Carpenter; I Saeed; A J Burghardt; L Yu; M Bruesewitz; S Khosla; T Lang
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2014-12-21       Impact factor: 3.609

8.  Finite element analysis for prediction of bone strength.

Authors:  Philippe K Zysset; Enrico Dall'ara; Peter Varga; Dieter H Pahr
Journal:  Bonekey Rep       Date:  2013-08-07

9.  On prediction of the strength levels and failure patterns of human vertebrae using quantitative computed tomography (QCT)-based finite element method.

Authors:  Majid Mirzaei; Ahad Zeinali; Arash Razmjoo; Majid Nazemi
Journal:  J Biomech       Date:  2009-05-19       Impact factor: 2.712

10.  Specimen-specific nonlinear finite element modeling to predict vertebrae fracture loads after vertebroplasty.

Authors:  Y Matsuura; H Giambini; Y Ogawa; Z Fang; A R Thoreson; M J Yaszemski; L Lu; K N An
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2014-10-15       Impact factor: 3.468

View more
  7 in total

Review 1.  Fracture risk assessment and clinical decision making for patients with metastatic bone disease.

Authors:  Timothy A Damron; Kenneth A Mann
Journal:  J Orthop Res       Date:  2020-03-23       Impact factor: 3.494

Review 2.  Deciphering the "Art" in Modeling and Simulation of the Knee Joint: Overall Strategy.

Authors:  Ahmet Erdemir; Thor F Besier; Jason P Halloran; Carl W Imhauser; Peter J Laz; Tina M Morrison; Kevin B Shelburne
Journal:  J Biomech Eng       Date:  2019-07-01       Impact factor: 2.097

3.  Opportunistic Computed Tomography and Spine Surgery: A Narrative Review.

Authors:  Matthew Shirley; Nathan Wanderman; Tony Keaveny; Paul Anderson; Brett A Freedman
Journal:  Global Spine J       Date:  2019-11-28

4.  Biomechanical analysis of vertebral wedge deformity in elderly women with quantitative CT-based finite element analysis.

Authors:  Ying Liu; Wei Zhang; Jing Liu; Xiaodong Cheng; Yan Wang; Ping Zhang; Lei Gao; Xingyuan Yang; Shaoqiang He
Journal:  BMC Musculoskelet Disord       Date:  2022-06-14       Impact factor: 2.562

5.  Effects of Scan Resolutions and Element Sizes on Bovine Vertebral Mechanical Parameters from Quantitative Computed Tomography-Based Finite Element Analysis.

Authors:  Meng Zhang; Jiazi Gao; Xu Huang; He Gong; Min Zhang; Bei Liu
Journal:  J Healthc Eng       Date:  2017-06-01       Impact factor: 2.682

6.  Effect of different CT scanners and settings on femoral failure loads calculated by finite element models.

Authors:  Florieke Eggermont; Loes C Derikx; Jeffrey Free; Ruud van Leeuwen; Yvette M van der Linden; Nico Verdonschot; Esther Tanck
Journal:  J Orthop Res       Date:  2018-03-06       Impact factor: 3.494

7.  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

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.