Effect of boundary conditions, impact loading and hydraulic stiffening on femoral fracture strength.

Patient specific quantitative CT (QCT) imaging data together with the finite element (FE) method may provide an accurate prediction of a patient's femoral strength and fracture risk. Although numerous FE models investigating femoral fracture strength have been published, there is little consent on the effect of boundary conditions, dynamic loading and hydraulic strengthening due to intra-medullary pressure on the predicted fracture strength. We developed a QCT-derived FE model of a proximal femur that included node-specific modulus assigned based on the local bone density. The effect of three commonly used boundary conditions published in literature were investigated by comparing the resulting strain field due to an applied fracture load. The models were also augmented with viscoelastic material properties and subject to a realistic impact load profile to determine the effect of dynamic loads on the strain field. Finally, the effect of hydraulic strengthening was investigated by including node specific permeability and performing a coupled pore diffusion and stress analysis of the FE model. Results showed that all boundary conditions yield the same strain field patterns, but peak strains were 22% lower and fracture load was 18% higher when loaded at the greater trochanter than when loaded at the femoral head. Comparison of the dynamic models showed that material viscoelasticity was important, but inertial effects (vibration and shock) were not. Finally, pore pressure changes did not cause significant hydraulic strengthening of bone under fall impact loading.

[1]  W Herzog,et al.  Evaluation of the finite element software ABAQUS for biomechanical modelling of biphasic tissues. , 1997, Journal of biomechanics.

[2]  S Blatcher,et al.  Influence of head constraint and muscle forces on the strain distribution within the intact femur. , 2000, Medical engineering & physics.

[3]  J. Bryant On the mechanical function of marrow in long bones. , 1988, Engineering in medicine.

[4]  T San Antonio,et al.  Orientation of orthotropic material properties in a femur FE model: a method based on the principal stresses directions. , 2012, Medical engineering & physics.

[5]  Y. Matsuyama,et al.  The effect of impact direction on the fracture load of osteoporotic proximal femurs. , 2009, Medical engineering & physics.

[6]  V. Kafka,et al.  A structural mathematical model for the viscoelastic anisotropic behaviour of trabecular bone. , 1983, Biorheology.

[7]  T. Keller,et al.  Hydraulic Strengthening Affects the Stiffness and Strength of Cortical Bone , 2005, Annals of Biomedical Engineering.

[8]  Panayiotis Papadopoulos,et al.  The modified super-ellipsoid yield criterion for human trabecular bone. , 2004, Journal of biomechanical engineering.

[9]  T. Keaveny,et al.  Yield strain behavior of trabecular bone. , 1998, Journal of biomechanics.

[10]  M. Bouxsein,et al.  Comparison of hip fracture risk prediction by femoral aBMD to experimentally measured factor of risk. , 2010, Bone.

[11]  T. M. Keaveny,et al.  Dependence of Intertrabecular Permeability on Flow Direction and Anatomic Site , 1999, Annals of Biomedical Engineering.

[12]  L Cristofolini,et al.  Influence of thigh muscles on the axial strains in a proximal femur during early stance in gait. , 1995, Journal of biomechanics.

[13]  H. Skinner,et al.  Prediction of femoral fracture load using automated finite element modeling. , 1997, Journal of biomechanics.

[14]  Peter Zioupos,et al.  The effect of strain rate on the mechanical properties of human cortical bone. , 2008, Journal of biomechanical engineering.

[15]  J H Keyak,et al.  Prediction of fracture location in the proximal femur using finite element models. , 2001, Medical engineering & physics.

[16]  E. Schneider,et al.  Influence of muscle forces on femoral strain distribution. , 1998, Journal of biomechanics.

[17]  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.

[18]  M. Viceconti,et al.  Accuracy of finite element predictions in sideways load configurations for the proximal human femur. , 2012, Journal of Biomechanics.

[19]  J. Keyak Improved prediction of proximal femoral fracture load using nonlinear finite element models. , 2001, Medical engineering & physics.

[20]  J. Szivek,et al.  An experimental method for the application of lateral muscle loading and its effect on femoral strain distributions. , 2000, Medical engineering & physics.

[21]  R. Guedes,et al.  Viscoelastic behaviour and failure of bovine cancellous bone under constant strain rate. , 2006, Journal of biomechanics.

[22]  Ridha Hambli,et al.  Finite element prediction of proximal femur fracture pattern based on orthotropic behaviour law coupled to quasi-brittle damage. , 2012, Medical engineering & physics.

[23]  S. Pashah,et al.  Prediction of structural response for low velocity impact , 2008 .

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

[25]  A. Roychowdhury,et al.  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. , 2007, Medical engineering & physics.

[26]  W. C. Hayes,et al.  Effects of loading rate on strength of the proximal femur , 1994, Calcified Tissue International.

[27]  U. Hansen,et al.  Microcracking damage and the fracture process in relation to strain rate in human cortical bone tensile failure. , 2008, Journal of biomechanics.

[28]  Marco Viceconti,et al.  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. , 2008, Journal of biomechanics.

[29]  A. Sanders,et al.  Stiffening of the femoral head due to inter-trabecular fluid and intraosseous pressure. , 1991, Journal of biomechanical engineering.

[30]  J. T. Bryant,et al.  The acetabular labrum seal: a poroelastic finite element model. , 2000, Clinical biomechanics.

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

[32]  P. Cripton,et al.  During sideways falls proximal femur fractures initiate in the superolateral cortex: evidence from high-speed video of simulated fractures. , 2009, Journal of biomechanics.

[33]  L. A. Taber,et al.  Vibrational characteristics of the embalmed human femur , 1981 .

[34]  Kozo Nakamura,et al.  Prediction of strength and strain of the proximal femur by a CT-based finite element method. , 2007, Journal of biomechanics.

[35]  Umut A. Gurkan,et al.  The Mechanical Environment of Bone Marrow: A Review , 2008, Annals of Biomedical Engineering.

[36]  W. Taylor,et al.  Physiologically based boundary conditions in finite element modelling. , 2007, Journal of biomechanics.

[37]  David A Hanley,et al.  Osteoporosis Canada 2010 Guidelines for the Assessment of Fracture Risk , 2011, Canadian Association of Radiologists journal = Journal l'Association canadienne des radiologistes.

[38]  M C Hobatho,et al.  Finite element modelling of the vibrational behaviour of the human femur using CT-based individualized geometrical and material properties. , 1998, Journal of biomechanics.

[39]  H. P. Lee,et al.  Comparison of implicit and explicit finite element methods for dynamic problems , 2000 .

[40]  Robin Olsson,et al.  Mass criterion for wave controlled impact response of composite plates , 2000 .

[41]  T. Keaveny,et al.  Dependence of yield strain of human trabecular bone on anatomic site. , 2001, Journal of biomechanics.

[42]  N. Sasaki,et al.  Anisotropic viscoelastic properties of cortical bone. , 2004, Journal of biomechanics.

[43]  J H Keyak,et al.  Prediction of femoral fracture load using finite element models: an examination of stress- and strain-based failure theories. , 2000, Journal of biomechanics.

[44]  W. Hayes,et al.  Fracture prediction for the proximal femur using finite element models: Part I--Linear analysis. , 1991, Journal of biomechanical engineering.

[45]  R. Pelker,et al.  Stress wave propagation in bone. , 1983, Journal of biomechanics.

[46]  M. Järvinen,et al.  Majority of Hip Fractures Occur as a Result of a Fall and Impact on the Greater Trochanter of the Femur: A Prospective Controlled Hip Fracture Study with 206 Consecutive Patients , 1999, Calcified Tissue International.

[47]  Yifei Dai,et al.  Robust QCT/FEA Models of Proximal Femur Stiffness and Fracture Load During a Sideways Fall on the Hip , 2011, Annals of Biomedical Engineering.

[48]  S. Goldstein,et al.  Femoral strength is better predicted by finite element models than QCT and DXA. , 1999, Journal of biomechanics.

[49]  T. Krauthammer Modern Protective Structures , 2008 .

[50]  C. M. Agrawal,et al.  The use of dynamic mechanical analysis to assess the viscoelastic properties of human cortical bone. , 2001, Journal of biomedical materials research.

[51]  W C Hayes,et al.  Prediction of femoral impact forces in falls on the hip. , 1991, Journal of biomechanical engineering.

[52]  John D Currey,et al.  Tensile yield in compact bone is determined by strain, post-yield behaviour by mineral content. , 2004, Journal of biomechanics.

[53]  Keita Ito,et al.  A new approach to determine the accuracy of morphology-elasticity relationships in continuum FE analyses of human proximal femur. , 2012, Journal of biomechanics.

[54]  H. Skinner,et al.  Correlations between orthogonal mechanical properties and density of trabecular bone: use of different densitometric measures. , 1994, Journal of biomedical materials research.

[55]  J D Bryant Kafka, V. (1993) letter to the editor: On hydraulic strengthening of bones. , 1995, Journal of biomechanics.