Physica Medica: European Journal of Medical Physics
Volume 26, Issue 2 , Pages 88-97 , April 2010

Noninvasive prediction of vertebral body compressive strength using nonlinear finite element method and an image based technique

  • Ahad Zeinali

      Affiliations

    • Department of Medical Imaging, Urmia Medical Sciences University, Urmia, Iran
    • Department of Medical Physics, Tarbiat Modares University, Tehran, Iran
    • ,
  • Bijan Hashemi

      Affiliations

    • Department of Medical Physics, Tarbiat Modares University, Tehran, Iran
    • Corresponding Author InformationCorresponding author. Tel.: +98 21 82883892; fax: +98 21 88006544.
    • ,
  • Shahram Akhlaghpoor

      Affiliations

    • Department of Radiology, Faculty of Medicine, Tehran University, Tehran, Iran

Received 12 May 2008 ,Revised 11 August 2009 ,Accepted 15 August 2009.

References 

  1. Riggs BL, Melton LJ. The worldwide problem of osteoporosis: insights afforded by epidemiology. Bone. 1995;17(5):505–511
  2. Cheng XG, Nichelson PH, Boonen S, Lowet G, Brys P, Aerssens J, et al. Prediction of vertebral strength in vitro by spinal bone densitometry and calcaneal ultrasound. J Bone Miner Res. 1997;12(10):1721–1728
  3. Singer K, Edmondstone S, Day R, Breidahl P, Price R. Prediction of thoracic and lumbar vertebral body compressive strength: correlations with bone mineral density and vertebral region. Bone. 1995;17(2):167–174
  4. Edmondson SJ, Singer KP, Day RE, Price RI, Breidahl PD. Ex vivo estimation of thoracolumbar vertebral body compressive strength: the relative contributions of bone densitometry and vertebral morphometry. Osteoporos Int. 1997;7(2):142–148
  5. Ebbesen EN, Thomson JS, Beck-Nielson H, Nepper-Rasmussen HJ, Mosekilde L. Vertebral bone density evaluated by dual-energy X-ray absorbtiometry and quantitative computed tomography in vitro. Bone. 1998;23(3):283–290
  6. Diamant I, Shahar R, Masharawi Y, Gefen A. A method for patient-specific evaluation of vertebral cancellous bone strength: in vitro validation. Clin Biomech. 2007;22(6):282–291
  7. Diamant I, Shahar R, Gefen A. How to select the elastic modulus for cancellous bone in patient-specific continuum models of the spine?. Med Biol Eng Comput. 2005;43(4):465–472
  8. Mittra E, Rubin C, Qin YX. Interrelationship of trabecular mechanical and microstructural properties in sheep trabecular bone. J Biomech. 2005;38(6):1229–1237
  9. Liebschner MAK, Kopperdahl DL, Rosenberg WS, Keaveny TM. Finite element modeling of the human thoracolumbar spine. Spine. 2003;28(6):559–565
  10. Crawford RP, Cann CE, Keaveny TM. Finite element models predict in vitro vertebral body compressive strength better than quantitative computed tomography. Bone. 2003;33(4):744–750
  11. Silva MJ, Keaveny TM, Hayes WC. Computed tomography-based finite element analysis predicts failure loads and fracture patterns. J Orthop Res. 1998;16(3):300–308
  12. Buckley JM, Loo K, Motherway J. Comparison of quantitative computed tomography-based measures in predicting vertebral compressive strength. Bone. 2007;40(3):767–774
  13. Imai K, Ohnishi I, Bessho M, Nakamura K. Nonlinear finite element model predicts vertebral bone strength and fracture site. Spine. 2006;31(16):1789–1794
  14. Buckley JM, Cheng L, Loo K, Slyfield C, Zheng X. Quantitative computed tomography-based predictions of vertebral strength in anterior bending. Spine. 2007;32(8):1019–1027
  15. Crawford RP, Rosenberg WS, Keaveny TM. Quantitative computed tomography-based finite element models of the human lumbar vertebral body: effect of element size on stiffness, damage, and fracture strength predictions. J Biomech Eng. 2003;125(4):434–438
  16. Mitton D, Cendre E, Roux JP, Arlot ME, Peix G, Rumelhart C, et al. Mechanical properties of ewe vertebral cancellous bone compared with histomorphometry and high-resolution computed tomography parameters. Bone. 1998;22(6):651–658
  17. Kopperdahl DL, Morgan EF, Keaveny TM. Quantitative computed tomography estimates of the mechanical properties of human vertebral trabecular bone. J Orthop Res. 2002;20(4):801–805
  18. Kopperdahl DL, Keaveny TM. Yield strain behavior of trabecular bone. J Biomech. 1998;31(7):601–608
  19. Morgan EF, Keaveny TM. Dependence of yield strain of human trabecular bone on anatomic site. J Biomech. 2001;34(5):569–577
  20. Morgan Elise F, Bayraktar Harun H, Keaveny Tony M. Trabecular bone modulus–density relationships depend on anatomic site. J Biomech. 2003;36(7):897–904
  21. Silva MJ, Wang C, Keaveny TM, Hayes WC. Direct and computed tomography thickness measurements of the human lumbar vertebral shell and endplate. Bone. 1994;15(4):409–414
  22. Shin CC, Jun S, Hansheng W. Sample size calculations in clinical research. 2nd ed.. Boca Raton, FL: Chapman & Hall; 2008;

PII: S1120-1797(09)00049-0

doi: 10.1016/j.ejmp.2009.08.002

Physica Medica: European Journal of Medical Physics
Volume 26, Issue 2 , Pages 88-97 , April 2010

Article Tools

* Image Usage & Resolution