Journal of Biomechanics
Volume 43, Issue 16 , Pages 3150-3155 , 1 December 2010

A quantitative comparison of a bone remodeling model with dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry and analysis of the inter-individual biological variability of femoral neck T-score

  • L. Santos

      Affiliations

    • IDMEC-IST, Technical University of Lisbon, Portugal
    • Rheumatology Research Unit, Instituto de Medicina Molecular, Lisbon School of Medicine, University of Lisbon, Lisbon, Portugal
    • ,
  • J.C. Romeu

      Affiliations

    • Rheumatology and Bone Diseases Department, Hospital de Santa Maria, Lisbon, Portugal
    • ,
  • H. Canhão

      Affiliations

    • Rheumatology Research Unit, Instituto de Medicina Molecular, Lisbon School of Medicine, University of Lisbon, Lisbon, Portugal
    • Rheumatology and Bone Diseases Department, Hospital de Santa Maria, Lisbon, Portugal
    • ,
  • J.E. Fonseca

      Affiliations

    • Rheumatology Research Unit, Instituto de Medicina Molecular, Lisbon School of Medicine, University of Lisbon, Lisbon, Portugal
    • Rheumatology and Bone Diseases Department, Hospital de Santa Maria, Lisbon, Portugal
    • ,
  • P.R. Fernandes

      Affiliations

    • IDMEC-IST, Technical University of Lisbon, Portugal
    • Corresponding Author InformationCorresponding author. Tel.: +351218417925; fax: +351218417915.

,Accepted 28 July 2010.

References 

  1. Bessho M, Ohnishi I, Matsuyama J, Matsumoto T, Imai K, Nakamura K. Prediction of strength and strain of the proximal femur. J. Biomech. 2007;40:1745–1753
  2. Canhão H, Fonseca JE, Queiroz MV. Epidemiologia da osteoporose, mecanismos de remodelação óssea e factores protectores do osso. Acta. Reum. Port. 2005;30:225–240
  3. Cody DD, Gross GJ, Hou FJ, Spencer HJ, Goldstein SA, Fyhrie DP. Femoral strength is better predicted by finite element models than QCT and DXA. J. Biomech. 1999;32:1013–1020
  4. Cody DD, Hou FJ, Divine GW, Fyhrie DP. Femoral structure and stiffness in patients with femoral neck fracture. J. Orthop. Res. 2000;18:443–448
  5. Cummings SR, Melton LJ. Epidemiology and outcomes of osteoporotic fractures. Lancet. 2002;359:1761–1767
  6. Currey J. The Mechanical Adaptation of Bones. Princeton University Press; 1984;
  7. Doblaré M, García JM. Application of an anisotropic bone remodelling model based on a damage–repair theory to the analysis of the proximal femur before and after total hip replacement. J. Biomech. 2001;34(9):1157–1170
  8. Fernandes P, Rodrigues H, Jacobs C. A model of bone adaptation using a global optimization criterion based on the trajectorial theory of Wolff. Comput. Methods Biomech. Biomed. Eng. 1999;2:125–138
  9. Fung YC. Bone and Cartilage. In:  Fung YC editors. Biomechanics Mechanical Properties of Living Tissues. New York: Springer-Verlag; 1993;p. 500–544
  10. García JM, Doblaré M, Cegoñino J. Bone remodelling simulation: a tool for implant design. Comput. Mater. Sci. 2002;25:100–114
  11. Gregory JS, Aspden RM. Femoral geometry as a risk factor for osteoporotic hip fracture in men and women. Med. Eng. Phys. 2008;30:1275–1286
  12. Guedes MP, Kikuchi N. Preprocessing and postprocessing for materials based on the homogenisation method with adaptive finite element method. Comput. Methods Appl. Mech. Eng. 1990;83:143–198
  13. Helgason B, Perilli E, Schileo E, Taddei F, Brynjólfsson S, Viceconti M. Mathematical relationships between bone density and mechanical properties: a literature review. Clin. Biomech. 2008;23(2):135–146
  14. Hernandez CJ, Keaveny TM. A biomechanical perspective on bone quality. Bone. 2006;39:1173–1181
  15. Herrera A, Panisello JJ, Ibarz E, Cegoñino J, Puértolas JA, Gracia L. Long-term study of bone remodelling after femoral stem: a comparison between dexa and finite element simulation. J. Biomech. 2007;40:3615–3625
  16. Huiskes R. Validation of adaptive bone-remodeling simulation models. In:  Lowet G, et al. editor. Bone Research in Biomechanics. IOS press; 1997;
  17. Jacobs C, Simo C, Beaupré G, Carter D. Adaptive bone remodelling incorporating simultaneous density and anisotropy considerations. J. Biomech. 1997;30:603–613
  18. Kanis JA. Diagnosis of osteoporosis and assessment of fracture risk. Lancet. 2002;359:1929–1936
  19. Kerner J, Huiskes R, van Lenthe GH, Weinans H, van Rietbergen B, Engh CA, et al. Correlation between pre-operative periprosthetic bone density and post-operative bone loss in THA can be explained by strain-adaptive remodelling. J. Biomech. 1999;32:695–703
  20. Keyak JH, Falkinstein Y. Comparison of in situ and in vitro CT scan-based finite element model predictions of proximal femoral fracture load. Med. Eng. Phys. 2003;25:781–787
  21. Kuiper, J.H., 1993. Numerical optimisation of artificial joint designs. Ph.D. Thesis, Katholieke Universiteit Nijmegen.
  22. Majumdera S, Roychowdhury A, Pal S. Simulation of hip fracture in sideways fall using a 3D finite element model of pelvis–femur–soft tissue complex with simplified representation of whole body by a CT-based finite element method. Med. Eng. Phys. 2007;29:1167–1178
  23. Schileo E, Taddei F, Malandrino A, Cristofolini L, Viceconti M. Subject-specific finite element models can accurately predict strain levels in long bones. J. Biomech. 2007;40(13):2982–2989
  24. Schileo E, Taddei F, Cristofolini L, Viceconti M. Subject-specific finite element models implementing a maximum principal strain criterion are able to estimate failure risk and fracture location on human femurs tested in vitro. J. Biomech. 2008;41(2):356–367
  25. Schuit SC, van der Klift M, Weel AE, de Laet CE, Burger H, Seeman E. Fracture incidence and association with bone mineral density in elderly men and women: the Rotterdam Study. Bone. 2004;34(1):195–202
  26. Taddei F, Cristofolini L, Martelli S, Gill HS, Viceconti M. Subject-specific finite element models of long bones: an in vitro evaluation of the overall accuracy. J. Biomech. 2006;39:2457–2467
  27. Turner AWL, Gillies RM, Sekel R, Morris P, Bruce W, Walsh WR. Computational bone remodelling simulations and comparisons with DEXA results. J. Orthop. Res. 2005;23:705–712
  28. Viceconti M, Olsen S, Nolte LP, Burton K. Extracting clinically relevant data from finite element simulations. Clin. Biomech. 2005;20:451–454
  29. Viceconti M, Casali M, Massari B, Cristofolini L, Bassini S, Toni A. The ‘standardized femur program’ proposal for a reference geometry to be used for the creation of finite element models of the femur. J.Biomech. 1996;29(9):1241
  30. Viceconti M, Davinelli M, Taddei F, Cappello A. Automatic generation of accurate subject-specific bone finite element models to be used in clinical studies. J. Biomech. 2004;37:1597–1605
  31. Weinans H, Huiskes R, et al. The behavior of adaptive bone remodeling simulation models. J. Biomech. 1992;25:1425–1441
  32. Wirtz DC, Pandorf T, Portheine F, Radermacher K, Schiffers N, Prescher A, et al. Concept and development of an orthotropic FE model of the proximal femur. J. Biomech. 2003;36:289–293

PII: S0021-9290(10)00419-7

doi: 10.1016/j.jbiomech.2010.07.028

Journal of Biomechanics
Volume 43, Issue 16 , Pages 3150-3155 , 1 December 2010

Article Tools

* Image Usage & Resolution