2012
DOI: 10.1016/j.bone.2012.01.012
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Ct-based finite element models can be used to estimate experimentally measured failure loads in the proximal femur

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

4
69
1
1

Year Published

2012
2012
2019
2019

Publication Types

Select...
8

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 116 publications
(75 citation statements)
references
References 40 publications
4
69
1
1
Order By: Relevance
“…were comparable to what models of intact human femurs in stance configuration achieve (R 2 = 0.82-0.95) [2,4,7,8,10,16]. QCT-based computer models were also able to catch the weakening of ovine femurs observed in vitro, even if the resection size had a larger influence on the FE predictions than it did experimentally.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 58%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…were comparable to what models of intact human femurs in stance configuration achieve (R 2 = 0.82-0.95) [2,4,7,8,10,16]. QCT-based computer models were also able to catch the weakening of ovine femurs observed in vitro, even if the resection size had a larger influence on the FE predictions than it did experimentally.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 58%
“…Each scan was converted to BMD from the Hounsfield units (HU) through linear regressions established from our phantom's inserts (0, 100, 200, 400, 600, 800 mg HA/cm 3 ). While phantoms often feature a smaller number of low-density inserts (only up to 200 mg/ cc) [2,8], ours was custom-made to minimize the error in the linear HU/BMD relationship. To deal with multiple regions of interest (ROIs), ImageJ's ROI manager [23] (National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, USA) was used.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Although the prediction accuracy is considerably high both for strains (R 2 >0.95, (Schileo et al, 2008;Yosibash et al, 2007)) and femoral strength (standard error of estimation(SEE)<400 N, (Koivumäki et al, 2012)), FE models have not yet been introduced in clinical practice. This is due to several reasons including concerns about validation (Henninger et al, 2010;Viceconti et al, 2005).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Several recent approaches have been developed to assign the anisotropic orientation of bone as a function of its cortical and trabecular structural morphology and mechanical behavior. These approaches include orientation methods using anatomical directions corresponding to the bone shape [7,26,38,90], variation in the CT Hounsfield unit values based on micromechanical considerations [30,66,73,76], bone remodeling simulation prior to fracture prediction to obtain the bone orthotropic orientation and elastic assignment [11,17,20,40,51], and a procedure to orientate orthotropic properties in a proximal femur FE model using the directions of the principal stresses produced by a physiological load scheme [64]. Empirical relations between the orthotropic constants and bone density have been suggested by several authors [29][30][31][32][33][34].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%