Computational modal analysis of a composite pelvic bone: convergence and validation studies

References

• Amestoy PR, Duff IS, L'Excellent J-Y, Koster J. 2001. A fully asynchronous multifrontal solver using distributed dynamic scheduling. SIAM J Matrix Anal Appl. 23(1):15–41.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Baca V, Horak Z, Mikulenka P, Dzupa V. 2008. Comparison of an inhomogeneous orthotropic and isotropic material models used for fe analyses. Med Eng Phys. 30(7):924–930.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bola AM, Ramos A, Simoes J. 2016. Sensitivity analysis for finite element modeling of humeral bone and cartilage. Biomater Biomech Bioengin. 3(2):71–84.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chen G, Schmutz B, Epari D, Rathnayaka K, Ibrahim S, Schuetz M, Pearcy M. 2010. A new approach for assigning bone material properties from ct images into finite element models. J Biomech. 43(5):1011–1015.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Conza N, Rixen D, Plomp S. 2007. Vibration testing of a fresh-frozen human pelvis: the role of the pelvic ligaments. J Biomech. 40(7):1599–1605.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Enns-Bray WS, Owoc JS, Nishiyama KK, Boyd SK. 2014. Mapping anisotropy of the proximal femur for enhanced image based finite element analysis. J Biomech. 47(13):3272–3278.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Grassi L, Schileo E, Taddei F, Zani L, Juszczyk M, Cristofolini L, Viceconti M. 2012. Accuracy of finite element predictions in sideways load configurations for the proximal human femur. J Biomech. 45(2):394–399.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Güerri-Fernández RC, Nogués X, Quesada Gómez JM, Torres del Pliego E, Puig L, García-Giralt N, Yoskovitz G, Mellibovsky L, Hansma PK, Díez-Pérez A. 2013. Microindentation for in vivo measurement of bone tissue material properties in atypical femoral fracture patients and controls. J Bone Miner Res. 28(1):162–168.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Guillaume P, Verboven P, Vanlanduit S, Van Der Auweraer H, Peeters B. 2003. A poly-reference implementation of the least-squares complex frequency-domain estimator. Proceedings of IMAC; Vol 21. p. 183–192.
   Google Scholar
• Henyš P, Čapek L. 2017. Material model of pelvic bone based on modal analysis: a study on the composite bone. Biomech Model Mechanobiol. 16(1):363–373.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hernandez V, Roman J, Tomas A, Vidal V. 2007. Krylov-schur methods in slepc. Universitat Politecnica de Valencia, Tech Rep STR-7.
   Google Scholar
• Heylen W, Sas P. 2006. Modal analysis theory and testing. Katholieke Universteit Leuven, Departement Werktuigkunde.
   Google Scholar
• Hsu JT, Chang CH, Huang HL, Zobitz ME, Chen WP, Lai KA, An KN. 2007. The number of screws, bone quality, and friction coefficient affect acetabular cup stability. Med Eng Phys. 29(10):1089–1095.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hsu JT, Lai KA, Chen Q, Zobitz ME, Huang HL, An KN, Chang CH. 2006. The relation between micromotion and screw fixation in acetabular cup. Comput Methods Programs Biomed. 84(1):34–41.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jun Y, Choi K. 2010. Design of patient-specific hip implants based on the 3d geometry of the human femur. Adv Eng Softw. 41(4):537–547.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lemanis R, Zachow S, Hoffmann R. 2016. Comparative cephalopod shell strength and the role of septum morphology on stress distribution. PeerJ. 4:e2434.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Logg A, Mardal KA, Wells GN. 2012. Automated solution of differential equations by the finite element method. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Neugebauer R, Werner M, Voigt C, Steinke H, Scholz R, Scherer S, Quickert M. 2011. Experimental modal analysis on fresh-frozen human hemipelvic bones employing a 3d laser vibrometer for the purpose of modal parameter identification. J Biomech. 44(8):1610–1613.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Oden JT, Prudhomme S. 2001. Goal-oriented error estimation and adaptivity for the finite element method. Comput Math Appl. 41(5–6):735–756.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Peng L, Bai J, Zeng X, Zhou Y. 2006. Comparison of isotropic and orthotropic material property assignments on femoral finite element models under two loading conditions. Med Eng Phys. 28(3):227–233.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Salo Z, Beek M, Wright D, Maloul A, Whyne CM. 2017. Analysis of pelvic strain in different gait configurations in a validated cohort of computed tomography based finite element models. J Biomech. 64:120–130.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sawbones. 2015. Sawbones catalogue. [accessed 2010 September 30]. Available from: http://www.sawbones.com/UserFiles/Docs/catalog.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• Scholz R, Hoffmann F, von Sachsen S, Drossel WG, Klöhn C, Voigt C. 2013. Validation of density-elasticity relationships for finite element modeling of human pelvic bone by modal analysis. J Biomech. 46(15):2667–2673.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shim VB, Battley M, Anderson IA, Munro JT. 2015. Validation of an efficient method of assigning material properties in finite element analysis of pelvic bone. Comput Methods Biomech Biomed Eng. 18(14):1495–1499.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Taddei F, Martelli S, Reggiani B, Cristofolini L, Viceconti M. 2006. Finite-element modeling of bones from ct data: sensitivity to geometry and material uncertainties. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng. 53(11):2194–2200.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Taddei F, Pancanti A, Viceconti M. 2004. An improved method for the automatic mapping of computed tomography numbers onto finite element models. Med Eng Phys. 26(1):61–69.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Taddei F, Schileo E, Helgason B, Cristofolini L, Viceconti M. 2007. The material mapping strategy influences the accuracy of ct-based finite element models of bones: an evaluation against experimental measurements. Medical Engineering & Physics. 29(9):973–979.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• The CGAL Project. 2015. CGAL user and reference manual. 4.7 ed. CGAL Editorial Board. Available from: http://doc.cgal.org/4.7/Manual/packages.html.
   Google Scholar
• Tsouknidas A, Anagnostidis K, Maliaris G, Michailidis N. 2012. Fracture risk in the femoral hip region: a finite element analysis supported experimental approach. J Biomech. 45(11):1959–1964.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Werner M, Quickert M, Kunze H, Voigt C, Hoffmann F, Steinke H. 2009. Applying modal analysis for comparing various fe models of human pelvic bone. Proceedings of the ICSV16, CD, Article. 689.
   Google Scholar
• Wirtz DC, Schiffers N, Pandorf T, Radermacher K, Weichert D, Forst R. 2000. Critical evaluation of known bone material properties to realize anisotropic fe-simulation of the proximal femur. J Biomech. 33(10):1325–1330.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yushkevich PA, Piven J, Cody Hazlett H, Gimpel Smith R, Ho S, Gee JC, Gerig G. 2006. User-guided 3D active contour segmentation of anatomical structures: Significantly improved efficiency and reliability. Neuroimage 31(3):1116–1128.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zienkiewicz OC, Zhu JZ. 1987. A simple error estimator and adaptive procedure for practical engineerng analysis. Int J Numer Meth Engng. 24(2):337–357.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar