Literature DB >> 29196764

Differences in Trabecular Microarchitecture and Simplified Boundary Conditions Limit the Accuracy of Quantitative Computed Tomography-Based Finite Element Models of Vertebral Failure.

Amira I Hussein1, Daniel T Louzeiro2, Ginu U Unnikrishnan2, Elise F Morgan2.   

Abstract

Vertebral fractures are common in the elderly, but efforts to reduce their incidence have been hampered by incomplete understanding of the failure processes that are involved. This study's goal was to elucidate failure processes in the lumbar vertebra and to assess the accuracy of quantitative computed tomography (QCT)-based finite element (FE) simulations of these processes. Following QCT scanning, spine segments (n = 27) consisting of L1 with adjacent intervertebral disks and neighboring endplates of T12 and L2 were compressed axially in a stepwise manner. A microcomputed tomography scan was performed at each loading step. The resulting time-lapse series of images was analyzed using digital volume correlation (DVC) to quantify deformations throughout the vertebral body. While some diversity among vertebrae was observed on how these deformations progressed, common features were large strains that developed progressively in the superior third and, concomitantly, in the midtransverse plane, in a manner that was associated with spatial variations in microstructural parameters such as connectivity density. Results of FE simulations corresponded qualitatively to the measured failure patterns when boundary conditions were derived from DVC displacements at the endplate. However, quantitative correspondence was often poor, particularly when boundary conditions were simplified to uniform compressive loading. These findings suggest that variations in trabecular microstructure are one cause of the differences in failure patterns among vertebrae and that both the lack of incorporation of these variations into QCT-based FE models and the oversimplification of boundary conditions limit the accuracy of these models in simulating vertebral failure.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 29196764      PMCID: PMC5816243          DOI: 10.1115/1.4038609

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


  39 in total

1.  Finite element models predict in vitro vertebral body compressive strength better than quantitative computed tomography.

Authors:  R Paul Crawford; Christopher E Cann; Tony M Keaveny
Journal:  Bone       Date:  2003-10       Impact factor: 4.398

2.  Time-dependent compressive deformation of the ageing spine: relevance to spinal stenosis.

Authors:  Phillip Pollintine; Manon S L M van Tunen; Jin Luo; Matthew D Brown; Patricia Dolan; Michael A Adams
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2010-02-15       Impact factor: 3.468

3.  The predictive value of quantitative computed tomography for vertebral body compressive strength and ash density.

Authors:  L Mosekilde; S M Bentzen; G Ortoft; J Jørgensen
Journal:  Bone       Date:  1989       Impact factor: 4.398

4.  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

5.  QCT-based finite element models predict human vertebral strength in vitro significantly better than simulated DEXA.

Authors:  E Dall'Ara; D Pahr; P Varga; F Kainberger; P Zysset
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2011-02-23       Impact factor: 4.507

6.  Incidence and economic burden of osteoporosis-related fractures in the United States, 2005-2025.

Authors:  Russel Burge; Bess Dawson-Hughes; Daniel H Solomon; John B Wong; Alison King; Anna Tosteson
Journal:  J Bone Miner Res       Date:  2007-03       Impact factor: 6.741

7.  High resolution quantitative computed tomography-based assessment of trabecular microstructure and strength estimates by finite-element analysis of the spine, but not DXA, reflects vertebral fracture status in men with glucocorticoid-induced osteoporosis.

Authors:  Christian Graeff; Fernando Marin; Helmut Petto; Ole Kayser; Andreas Reisinger; Jaime Peña; Philippe Zysset; Claus-Christian Glüer
Journal:  Bone       Date:  2012-11-10       Impact factor: 4.398

8.  Experimental validation of finite element analysis of human vertebral collapse under large compressive strains.

Authors:  Hadi S Hosseini; Allison L Clouthier; Philippe K Zysset
Journal:  J Biomech Eng       Date:  2014-04       Impact factor: 2.097

9.  A nonlinear finite element model validation study based on a novel experimental technique for inducing anterior wedge-shape fractures in human vertebral bodies in vitro.

Authors:  E Dall'Ara; R Schmidt; D Pahr; P Varga; Y Chevalier; J Patsch; F Kainberger; P Zysset
Journal:  J Biomech       Date:  2010-05-11       Impact factor: 2.712

10.  Compound risk of high mortality following osteoporotic fracture and refracture in elderly women and men.

Authors:  Dana Bliuc; Nguyen D Nguyen; Tuan V Nguyen; John A Eisman; Jacqueline R Center
Journal:  J Bone Miner Res       Date:  2013-11       Impact factor: 6.741

View more
  10 in total

1.  Association of vertebral endplate microstructure with bone strength in men and women.

Authors:  MeiLissa McKay; Timothy M Jackman; Amira I Hussein; Ali Guermazi; Jingjiang Liu; Elise F Morgan
Journal:  Bone       Date:  2019-11-06       Impact factor: 4.398

2.  Material Mapping of QCT-Derived Scapular Models: A Comparison with Micro-CT Loaded Specimens Using Digital Volume Correlation.

Authors:  Nikolas K Knowles; Jonathan Kusins; Mohammadreza Faieghi; Melissa Ryan; Enrico Dall'Ara; Louis M Ferreira
Journal:  Ann Biomed Eng       Date:  2019-07-11       Impact factor: 3.934

Review 3.  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

4.  A Three-Dimensional Cement Quantification Method for Decision Prediction of Vertebral Recompression after Vertebroplasty.

Authors:  Yanming Zhang; Tao Zhang; Xiang Ge; Yong Ma; Zhenduo Cui; Shuilin Wu; Yanqin Liang; Shengli Zhu; Zhaoyang Li
Journal:  Comput Math Methods Med       Date:  2022-05-12       Impact factor: 2.809

5.  Effect of fabric on the accuracy of computed tomography-based finite element analyses of the vertebra.

Authors:  Yuanqiao Wu; Elise F Morgan
Journal:  Biomech Model Mechanobiol       Date:  2019-09-10

6.  Digital tomosynthesis based digital volume correlation: A clinically viable noninvasive method for direct measurement of intravertebral displacements using images of the human spine under physiological load.

Authors:  Daniel Oravec; Michael J Flynn; Roger Zauel; Sudhaker Rao; Yener N Yeni
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2019-08-31       Impact factor: 4.071

7.  Assessment of Intravertebral Mechanical Strains and Cancellous Bone Texture Under Load Using a Clinically Available Digital Tomosynthesis Modality.

Authors:  Daniel Oravec; Joshua Drost; Roger Zauel; Michael J Flynn; Yener N Yeni
Journal:  J Biomech Eng       Date:  2021-10-01       Impact factor: 1.899

8.  The Application of Digital Volume Correlation (DVC) to Evaluate Strain Predictions Generated by Finite Element Models of the Osteoarthritic Humeral Head.

Authors:  Jonathan Kusins; Nikolas Knowles; Melanie Columbus; Sara Oliviero; Enrico Dall'Ara; George S Athwal; Louis M Ferreira
Journal:  Ann Biomed Eng       Date:  2020-06-22       Impact factor: 3.934

Review 9.  Digital volume correlation for the characterization of musculoskeletal tissues: Current challenges and future developments.

Authors:  Enrico Dall'Ara; Gianluca Tozzi
Journal:  Front Bioeng Biotechnol       Date:  2022-10-04

Review 10.  Trabecular Architecture and Mechanical Heterogeneity Effects on Vertebral Body Strength.

Authors:  Joshua D Auger; Neilesh Frings; Yuanqiao Wu; Andre Gutierrez Marty; Elise F Morgan
Journal:  Curr Osteoporos Rep       Date:  2020-11-20       Impact factor: 5.096

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.