Medical Engineering & Physics
Volume 28, Issue 3 , Pages 227-233 , April 2006

Comparison of isotropic and orthotropic material property assignments on femoral finite element models under two loading conditions

Received 7 January 2005 ,Revised 16 May 2005 ,Accepted 15 June 2005.

References 

  1. Stülpner MA, Reddy BD, Starke GR, Spirakis A. A three-dimensional finite analysis of adaptive remodelling in the proximal femur. J Biomech. 1997;30(10):1063–1066
  2. Duda GN, Heller M, Albinger J, Schulz O, Schneider E, Claes L. Influence of muscle forces on femoral strain distribution. J Biomech. 1998;31(9):841–846
  3. Kowalczyk P. Design optimization of cementless femoral hip prostheses using finite element analysis. J Biomech Eng—T ASME. 2001;123(5):396–402
  4. Keyak JH. Improved prediction of proximal femoral fracture load using nonlinear finite element models. Med Eng Phys. 2001;23(3):165–173
  5. Odgaard A. Three-dimensional methods for quantification of cancellous bone architecture. Bone. 1997;20(4):315–328
  6. Viceconti M, Bellingeri L, Cristofolini L, Toni A. A comparative study on different methods of automatic mesh generation of human femurs. Med Eng Phys. 1998;20(1):1–10
  7. Lengsfeld M, Schmitt J, Alter P, Kaminsky J, Leppek R. Comparison of geometry-based and CT voxel-based finite element modelling and experimental validation. Med Eng Phys. 1998;20(7):515–522
  8. Rho JY, Hobatho MC, Ashman RB. Relations of mechanical-properties to density and ct numbers in human bone. Med Eng Phys. 1995;17(5):347–355
  9. Wirtz DC, Schiffers N, Pandorf T, Radermacher K, Weichert D, Forst R. Critical evaluation of known bone material properties to realize anisotropic FE-simulation of the proximal femur. J Biomech. 2000;33(10):1325–1330
  10. Morgan EF, Bayraktar HH, Keaveny TM. Trabecular bone modulus-density relationships depend on anatomic site. J Biomech. 2003;36(7):897–904
  11. Couteau B, Hobatho MC, Darmana R, Brignola JC, Arlaud JY. Finite element modelling of the vibrational behaviour of the human femur using CT-based individualized geometrical and material properties. J Biomech. 1998;31(4):383–386
  12. Keyak JH, Falkinstein Y. Comparison of in situ and in vitro CT scan-based finite element model predictions of proximal femoral fracture load. Med Eng Phys. 2003;25(9):781–787
  13. Zannoni C, Mantovani R, Viceconti M. Material properties assignment to finite element models of bone structures: a new method. Med Eng Phys. 1998;20(10):735–740
  14. Taddei F, Pancanti A, Viceconti M. An improved method for the automatic mapping of computed tomography numbers onto finite element models. Med Eng Phys. 2004;26(1):61–69
  15. Taylor WR, Roland E, Ploeg H, Hertig D, Klabunde R, Warner MD, et al. Determination of orthotropic bone elastic constants using FEA and modal analysis. J Biomech. 2002;35(6):767–773
  16. Wirtz DC, Pandorf T, Portheine F, Radermacher K, Schiffers N, Prescher A, et al. Concept and development of an orthotropic FE model of the proximal femur. J Biomech. 2003;36(2):289–293
  17. Spitzer V, Ackerman MJ, Scherzinger AL, Whitlock D. The visible human male: a technical report. J Am Med Inf Assoc. 1996;3(2):118–130
  18. Pitzen T, Geisler F, Matthis D, Muller-Storz H, Barbier D, Steudel WI, et al. A finite element model for predicting the biomechanical behaviour of the human lumbar spine. Contr Eng Pract. 2002;10(1):83–90

PII: S1350-4533(05)00135-9

doi: 10.1016/j.medengphy.2005.06.003

Medical Engineering & Physics
Volume 28, Issue 3 , Pages 227-233 , April 2006

Article Tools

* Image Usage & Resolution