Literature DB >> 27918708

Patient-specific Hip Fracture Strength Assessment with Microstructural MR Imaging-based Finite Element Modeling.

Chamith S Rajapakse1, Alexandra Hotca1, Benjamin T Newman1, Austin Ramme1, Shaleen Vira1, Elizabeth A Kobe1, Rhiannon Miller1, Stephen Honig1, Gregory Chang1.   

Abstract

Purpose To describe a nonlinear finite element analysis method by using magnetic resonance (MR) images for the assessment of the mechanical competence of the hip and to demonstrate the reproducibility of the tool. Materials and Methods This prospective study received institutional review board approval and fully complied with HIPAA regulations for patient data. Written informed consent was obtained from all subjects. A nonlinear finite element analysis method was developed to estimate mechanical parameters that relate to hip fracture resistance by using MR images. Twenty-three women (mean age ± standard deviation, 61.7 years ± 13.8) were recruited from a single osteoporosis center. To thoroughly assess the reproducibility of the finite element method, three separate analyses were performed: a test-retest reproducibility analysis, where each of the first 13 subjects underwent MR imaging on three separate occasions to determine longitudinal variability, and an intra- and interoperator reproducibility analysis, where a single examination was performed in each of the next 10 subjects and four operators independently performed the analysis two times in each of the subjects. Reproducibility of parameters that reflect fracture resistance was assessed by using the intraclass correlation coefficient and the coefficient of variation. Results For test-retest reproducibility analysis and inter- and intraoperator analyses for proximal femur stiffness, yield strain, yield load, ultimate strain, ultimate load, resilience, and toughness in both stance and sideways-fall loading configurations each had an individual median coefficient of variation of less than 10%. Additionally, all measures had an intraclass correlation coefficient higher than 0.99. Conclusion This experiment demonstrates that the finite element analysis model can consistently and reliably provide fracture risk information on correctly segmented bone images. © RSNA, 2016 Online supplemental material is available for this article.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27918708      PMCID: PMC5452878          DOI: 10.1148/radiol.2016160874

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Radiology        ISSN: 0033-8419            Impact factor:   11.105


  25 in total

Review 1.  Quantitative computed tomography.

Authors:  Thomas F Lang
Journal:  Radiol Clin North Am       Date:  2010-05       Impact factor: 2.303

2.  New approaches for interpreting projected bone densitometry data.

Authors:  D R Carter; M L Bouxsein; R Marcus
Journal:  J Bone Miner Res       Date:  1992-02       Impact factor: 6.741

3.  Hip fracture in women without osteoporosis.

Authors:  Stacey A Wainwright; Lynn M Marshall; Kristine E Ensrud; Jane A Cauley; Dennis M Black; Teresa A Hillier; Marc C Hochberg; Molly T Vogt; Eric S Orwoll
Journal:  J Clin Endocrinol Metab       Date:  2005-02-22       Impact factor: 5.958

4.  Improved prediction of proximal femoral fracture load using nonlinear finite element models.

Authors:  J H Keyak
Journal:  Med Eng Phys       Date:  2001-04       Impact factor: 2.242

Review 5.  Osteoporosis imaging: state of the art and advanced imaging.

Authors:  Thomas M Link
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2012-04       Impact factor: 11.105

6.  Feasibility of three-dimensional MRI of proximal femur microarchitecture at 3 tesla using 26 receive elements without and with parallel imaging.

Authors:  Gregory Chang; Cem M Deniz; Stephen Honig; Chamith S Rajapakse; Kenneth Egol; Ravinder R Regatte; Ryan Brown
Journal:  J Magn Reson Imaging       Date:  2013-10-29       Impact factor: 4.813

7.  Population-based study of survival after osteoporotic fractures.

Authors:  C Cooper; E J Atkinson; S J Jacobsen; W M O'Fallon; L J Melton
Journal:  Am J Epidemiol       Date:  1993-05-01       Impact factor: 4.897

Review 8.  Diagnosis of osteoporosis and assessment of fracture risk.

Authors:  John A Kanis
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  2002-06-01       Impact factor: 79.321

9.  Mortality, disability, and nursing home use for persons with and without hip fracture: a population-based study.

Authors:  Cynthia L Leibson; Anna N A Tosteson; Sherine E Gabriel; Jeanine E Ransom; L Joseph Melton
Journal:  J Am Geriatr Soc       Date:  2002-10       Impact factor: 5.562

10.  Meta-analysis of how well measures of bone mineral density predict occurrence of osteoporotic fractures.

Authors:  D Marshall; O Johnell; H Wedel
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1996-05-18
View more
  9 in total

Review 1.  Micro-Finite Element Analysis of the Proximal Femur on the Basis of High-Resolution Magnetic Resonance Images.

Authors:  Chamith S Rajapakse; Gregory Chang
Journal:  Curr Osteoporos Rep       Date:  2018-12       Impact factor: 5.096

2.  MRI-based assessment of proximal femur strength compared to mechanical testing.

Authors:  Chamith S Rajapakse; Alexander R Farid; Daniel C Kargilis; Brandon C Jones; Jae S Lee; Alyssa J Johncola; Alexandra S Batzdorf; Snehal S Shetye; Michael W Hast; Gregory Chang
Journal:  Bone       Date:  2020-01-09       Impact factor: 4.398

3.  Influence of bone lesion location on femoral bone strength assessed by MRI-based finite-element modeling.

Authors:  Chamith S Rajapakse; Nishtha Gupta; Marissa Evans; Hamza Alizai; Malika Shukurova; Abigail L Hong; Nicholas J Cruickshank; Nirmal Tejwani; Kenneth Egol; Stephen Honig; Gregory Chang
Journal:  Bone       Date:  2019-03-07       Impact factor: 4.398

Review 4.  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 5.  MRI assessment of bone structure and microarchitecture.

Authors:  Gregory Chang; Sean Boone; Dimitri Martel; Chamith S Rajapakse; Robert S Hallyburton; Mitch Valko; Stephen Honig; Ravinder R Regatte
Journal:  J Magn Reson Imaging       Date:  2017-02-06       Impact factor: 4.813

Review 6.  MRI-based mechanical competence assessment of bone using micro finite element analysis (micro-FEA): Review.

Authors:  Saeed Jerban; Salem Alenezi; Amir Masoud Afsahi; Yajun Ma; Jiang Du; Christine B Chung; Eric Y Chang
Journal:  Magn Reson Imaging       Date:  2022-01-25       Impact factor: 2.546

Review 7.  Finite Element Assessment of Bone Fragility from Clinical Images.

Authors:  Enrico Schileo; Fulvia Taddei
Journal:  Curr Osteoporos Rep       Date:  2021-12-21       Impact factor: 5.096

8.  Segmentation of the Proximal Femur from MR Images using Deep Convolutional Neural Networks.

Authors:  Cem M Deniz; Siyuan Xiang; R Spencer Hallyburton; Arakua Welbeck; James S Babb; Stephen Honig; Kyunghyun Cho; Gregory Chang
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2018-11-07       Impact factor: 4.379

9.  Patient-Specific Phantomless Estimation of Bone Mineral Density and Its Effects on Finite Element Analysis Results: A Feasibility Study.

Authors:  Young Han Lee; Jung Jin Kim; In Gwun Jang
Journal:  Comput Math Methods Med       Date:  2019-01-03       Impact factor: 2.238

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.