Development of a customized density—modulus relationship for use in subject-specific finite element models of the ulna

Abstract Assigning an appropriate density—modulus relationship is an important factor when applying inhomogeneous material properties to finite element models of bone. The purpose of this study was to develop a customized density—modulus equation for the distal ulna, using beam theory combined with experimental results. Five custom equations of the form E = aρb were used to apply material properties to models of eight ulnae. All equations passed through a point (1.85, Ec), where ρ = 1.85 g/cm3 represents the average density of cortical bone. For custom equations (1) to (3), Ec was predicted using beam theory, and the value of b was varied within the range reported in the literature. Custom equations (4) and (5) used other values of Ec from the literature, while keeping b constant. Results obtained from the custom equations were compared with those from other equations in the literature, and with experimental results. The beam theory analysis predicted Ec = 21 ± 1.6 GPa, and the three custom equations using this value tended to have the lowest errors. The power of the equations did not affect the results as much as the value used for Ec. Overall, a customized density—modulus relationship for the ulna was generated, which provided improved results over using previously reported density—modulus equations.

[1]  M. Viceconti,et al.  Mathematical relationships between bone density and mechanical properties: a literature review. , 2008, Clinical biomechanics.

[2]  Marco Viceconti,et al.  An accurate estimation of bone density improves the accuracy of subject-specific finite element models. , 2008, Journal of biomechanics.

[3]  D S Barker,et al.  Validation of a finite element model of the human metacarpal. , 2005, Medical engineering & physics.

[4]  Cynthia E Dunning,et al.  The effect of distal ulnar implant stem material and length on bone strains. , 2007, The Journal of hand surgery.

[5]  D R Sumner,et al.  Sensitivity of periprosthetic stress-shielding to load and the bone density-modulus relationship in subject-specific finite element models. , 2000, Journal of biomechanics.

[6]  K. Radermacher,et al.  Critical evaluation of known bone material properties to realize anisotropic FE-simulation of the proximal femur. , 2000, Journal of biomechanics.

[7]  E. Schneider,et al.  Estimation of mechanical properties of cortical bone by computed tomography , 1991, Journal of orthopaedic research : official publication of the Orthopaedic Research Society.

[8]  Marco Viceconti,et al.  Subject-specific finite element models can accurately predict strain levels in long bones. , 2007, Journal of biomechanics.

[9]  D. Holdsworth,et al.  The effect of the density-modulus relationship selected to apply material properties in a finite element model of long bone. , 2008, Journal of biomechanics.

[10]  T. Keller Predicting the compressive mechanical behavior of bone. , 1994, Journal of biomechanics.

[11]  T. Keaveny,et al.  Trabecular bone modulus-density relationships depend on anatomic site. , 2003, Journal of biomechanics.

[12]  W. Hayes,et al.  Mechanical properties of trabecular bone from the proximal femur: a quantitative CT study. , 1990, Journal of computer assisted tomography.

[13]  W C Hayes,et al.  Mechanical properties of metaphyseal bone in the proximal femur. , 1991, Journal of biomechanics.

[14]  W. Hayes,et al.  The compressive behavior of bone as a two-phase porous structure. , 1977, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. American volume.

[15]  James A. Johnson,et al.  Design and implementation of an instrumented ulnar head prosthesis to measure loads in vitro. , 2006, Journal of biomechanics.