Separate modeling of cortical and trabecular bone offers little improvement in FE predictions of local structural stiffness at the proximal tibia

References

• Austman RL, Milner JS, Holdsworth DW, Dunning CE. 2008. The effect of the density–modulus relationship selected to apply material properties in a finite element model of long bone. J Biomech. 41(15):3171–3176.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bessho M, Ohnishi I, Matsuyama J, Matsumoto T, Imai K, Nakamura K. 2007. Prediction of strength and strain of the proximal femur by a CT-based finite element method. J Biomech. 40(8):1745–1753.
   Google Scholar
• Carter DR, Hayes WC. 1977. The compressive behavior of bone as a two-phase porous structure. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 59(7):954–962.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chappard C, Peyrin F, Bonnassie A, Lemineur G, Brunet-Imbault B, Lespessailles E, Benhamou CL. 2006. Subchondral bone micro-architectural alterations in osteoarthritis: a synchrotron micro-computed tomography study. Osteoarthr Cartil. 14(3):215–223.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chen G, Schmutz B, Epari D, Rathnayaka K, Ibrahim S, Schuetz MA, Pearcy MJ. 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
• Chen G, Wu FY, Liu ZC, Yang K, Cui F. 2015. Comparisons of node-based and element-based approaches of assigning bone material properties onto subject-specific finite element models. Med Eng Phys. 37(8):808–812.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Clark J, Huber J. 1990. The structure of the human subchondral plate. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 72(5):866–873.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cong A, Buijs JOD, Dragomir-Daescu D. 2011. In situ parameter identification of optimal density–elastic modulus relationships in subject-specific finite element models of the proximal femur. Med Eng Phy. 33(2):164–173.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ding M, Odgaard A, Hvid I. 2003. Changes in the three-dimensional microstructure of human tibial cancellous bone in early osteoarthritis. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 85(6):906–912.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Dragomir-Daescu D, Op Den Buijs J, McEligot S, Dai Y, Entwistle RC, Salas C, Melton LJ, Bennet KE, Khosla S, Amin S. 2011. Robust QCT/FEA models of proximal femur stiffness and fracture load during a sideways fall on the hip [journal article]. Ann Biomed Eng. 39(2):742–755.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dragomir-Daescu D, Salas C, Uthamaraj S, Rossman T. 2015. Quantitative computed tomography-based finite element analysis predictions of femoral strength and stiffness depend on computed tomography settings. J Biomech. 48(1):153–161.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Eberle S, Göttlinger M, Augat P. 2013. An investigation to determine if a single validated density-elasticity relationship can be used for subject specific finite element analyses of human long bones. Med Eng Phys. 35(7):875–883.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Edwards WB, Schnitzer TJ, Troy KL. 2013. Torsional stiffness and strength of the proximal tibia are better predicted by finite element models than DXA or QCT. J Biomech. 46(10):1655–1662.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Enns-Bray WS, Ariza O, Gilchrist S, Widmer Soyka RP, Vogt PJ, Palsson H, Boyd SK, Guy P, Cripton PA, Ferguson SJ, et al. 2016. Morphology based anisotropic finite element models of the proximal femur validated with experimental data. Med Eng Phys. 38(11):1339–1347.
   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
• Goulet RW, Goldstein SA, Ciarelli MJ, Kuhn JL, Brown M, Feldkamp L. 1994. The relationship between the structural and orthogonal compressive properties of trabecular bone. J Biomech. 27(4):375–389.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gray HA, Taddei F, Zavatsky AB, Cristofolini L, Gill HS. 2008. Experimental validation of a finite element model of a human cadaveric tibia. J Biomech Eng. 130(3):031016–031016.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gupta S, van der Helm FCT, Sterk JC, van Keulen F, Kaptein BL. 2004. Development and experimental validation of a three-dimensional finite element model of the human scapula. Proc Inst Mech Eng H. 218(2):127–142.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Helgason, B, Perilli, E, Schileo, E, Taddei, F, Brynjólfsson, S, Viceconti, M. 2008. Mathematical relationships between bone density and mechanical properties: A literature review. Clinical Biomechanics. 23(2):135–146. doi:10.1016/j.clinbiomech.2007.08.024.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Helgason B, Taddei F, Pálsson H, Schileo E, Cristofolini L, Viceconti M, Brynjólfsson S. 2008. A modified method for assigning material properties to FE models of bones. Med Eng Phys. 30(4):444–453.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Johnston JD, Kontulainen SA, Masri BA, Wilson DR. 2011. Predicting subchondral bone stiffness using a depth-specific CT topographic mapping technique in normal and osteoarthritic proximal tibiae. Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon). 26(10):1012–1018.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Johnston JD, Masri BA, Wilson DR. 2009. Computed tomography topographic mapping of subchondral density (CT-TOMASD) in osteoarthritic and normal knees: methodological development and preliminary findings. Osteoarthr Cartil. 17(10):1319–1326.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kersh ME, Zysset PK, Pahr DH, Wolfram U, Larsson D, Pandy MG. 2013. Measurement of structural anisotropy in femoral trabecular bone using clinical-resolution CT images. J Biomech. 46(15):2659–2666.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kluess D, Souffrant R, Mittelmeier W, Wree A, Schmitz K-P, Bader R. 2009. A convenient approach for finite-element-analyses of orthopaedic implants in bone contact: Modeling and experimental validation. Comput Methods Programs Biomed. 95(1):23–30.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Larsson D, Luisier B, Kersh M, Dall’Ara E, Zysset P, Pandy M, Pahr D. 2014. Assessment of transverse isotropy in clinical-level CT images of trabecular bone using the gradient structure tensor. Ann Biomed Eng. 42(5):950–959. English.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Maquer G, Musy SN, Wandel J, Gross T, Zysset PK. 2015. Bone volume fraction and fabric anisotropy are better determinants of trabecular bone stiffness than other morphological variables. J Bone Miner Res. 30(6):1000–1008.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Milz S, Putz R. 1994. Quantitative morphology of the subchondral plate of the tibial plateau. J Anat. 185(Pt 1):103.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Nazemi SM, Amini M, Kontulainen SA, Milner JS, Holdsworth DW, Masri BA, Wilson DR, Johnston JD. 2015. Prediction of local proximal tibial subchondral bone structural stiffness using subject-specific finite element modeling: Effect of selected density-modulus relationship. Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon). 30(7):703–712.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nazemi SM, Amini M, Kontulainen SA, Milner JS, Holdsworth DW, Masri BA, Wilson DR, Johnston JD. 2017. Optimizing finite element predictions of local subchondral bone structural stiffness using neural network-derived density-modulus relationships for proximal tibial subchondral cortical and trabecular bone. Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon). 41:1–8.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nazemi SM, Kalajahi SMH, Cooper DML, Kontulainen SA, Holdsworth DW, Masri BA, Wilson DR, Johnston JD. 2017. Accounting for spatial variation of trabecular anisotropy with subject-specific finite element modeling moderately improves predictions of local subchondral bone stiffness at the proximal tibia. J Biomech. 59:101–108.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pakdel A, Fialkov J, Whyne CM. 2016. High resolution bone material property assignment yields robust subject specific finite element models of complex thin bone structures. J Biomech. 49(9):1454–1460.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pakdel A, Mainprize JG, Robert N, Fialkov J, Whyne CM. 2014. Model-based PSF and MTF estimation and validation from skeletal clinical CT images. Med Phys. 41(1):011906
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Radin E, Paul I, Rose R. 1972. Role of mechanical factors in pathogenesis of primary osteoarthritis. Lancet. 1(7749):519–522.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Radin EL, Rose RM. 1986. Role of subchondral bone in the initiation and progression of cartilage damage. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 213:34–40.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rho JY, Hobatho MC, Ashman RB. 1995. Relations of mechanical properties to density and CT numbers in human bone. Med Eng Phys. 17(5):347–355.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Snyder SM, Schneider E. 1991. Estimation of mechanical properties of cortical bone by computed tomography. J Orthop Res. 9(3):422–431.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sven P, Klaus E, Willi AK. 1999. Accuracy limits for the determination of cortical width and density: the influence of object size and CT imaging parameters. Phys Med Biol. 44(3):751.
   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. Med Eng Phys. 29(9):973–979.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Treece GM, Poole KES, Gee AH. 2012. Imaging the femoral cortex: thickness, density and mass from clinical CT. Med Image Anal. 16(5):952–965.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tuncer M, Hansen UN, Amis AA. 2014. Prediction of structural failure of tibial bone models under physiological loads: Effect of CT density-modulus relationships. Med Eng Phys. 36(8):991–997.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Venäläinen MS, Mononen ME, Väänänen SP, Jurvelin JS, Töyräs J, Virén T, Korhonen RK. 2016. Effect of bone inhomogeneity on tibiofemoral contact mechanics during physiological loading. J Biomech. 49(7):1111–1120.
   PubMed Web of Science ®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
• Yamada K, Healey R, Amiel D, Lotz M, Coutts R. 2002. Subchondral bone of the human knee joint in aging and osteoarthritis. Osteoarthr Cartil. 10(5):360–369.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zannoni C, Mantovani R, Viceconti M. 1999. Material properties assignment to finite element models of bone structures: a new method. Med Eng Phy. 20(10):735–740.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zysset PK, Curnier A. 1995. An alternative model for anisotropic elasticity based on fabric tensors. Mech Mater. 21(4):243–250.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zysset PK, Sonny M, Hayes WC. 1994. Morphology-mechanical property relations in trabecular bone of the osteoarthritic proximal tibia. J Arthroplasty. 9(2):203–216.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar