0
Research Papers

Effects of Different Loading Patterns on the Trabecular Bone Morphology of the Proximal Femur Using Adaptive Bone Remodeling

[+] Author and Article Information
S. Mohammad Ali Banijamali, Ashkan Vaziri

Department of Mechanical
and Industrial Engineering,
Northeastern University,
Boston, MA 02115

Ramin Oftadeh

Department of Mechanical
and Industrial Engineering,
Northeastern University,
Boston, MA 02115
Center for Advanced Orthopaedic Studies,
Department of Orthopaedic Surgery,
Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center,
Harvard Medical School,
Boston, MA 02215

Ara Nazarian

Center for Advanced Orthopaedic Studies,
Department of Orthopaedic Surgery,
Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center,
Harvard Medical School,
Boston, MA 02215

Ruben Goebel

Sport Science Program,
Qatar University,
Doha 2713, Qatar

Hamid Nayeb-Hashemi

Professor of Mechanical Engineering
Department of Mechanical
and Industrial Engineering,
Northeastern University,
334 Snell Engineering Center,
360 Huntington Avenue,
Boston, MA 02115
e-mail: hamid@coe.neu.edu

1Corresponding author.

Manuscript received August 8, 2014; final manuscript received November 7, 2014; accepted manuscript posted November 13, 2014; published online December 10, 2014. Assoc. Editor: Blaine Christiansen.

J Biomech Eng 137(1), 011011 (Jan 01, 2015) (8 pages) Paper No: BIO-14-1377; doi: 10.1115/1.4029059 History: Received August 08, 2014; Revised November 07, 2014; Accepted November 13, 2014; Online December 10, 2014

In this study, the changes in the bone density of human femur model as a result of different loadings were investigated. The model initially consisted of a solid shell representing cortical bone encompassing a cubical network of interconnected rods representing trabecular bone. A computationally efficient program was developed that iteratively changed the structure of trabecular bone by keeping the local stress in the structure within a defined stress range. The stress was controlled by either enhancing existing beam elements or removing beams from the initial trabecular frame structure. Analyses were performed for two cases of homogenous isotropic and transversely isotropic beams. Trabecular bone structure was obtained for three load cases: walking, stair climbing and stumbling without falling. The results indicate that trabecular bone tissue material properties do not have a significant effect on the converged structure of trabecular bone. In addition, as the magnitude of the loads increase, the internal structure becomes denser in critical zones. Loading associated with the stumbling results in the highest density; whereas walking, considered as a routine daily activity, results in the least internal density in different regions. Furthermore, bone volume fraction at the critical regions of the converged structure is in good agreement with previously measured data obtained from combinations of dual X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) and computed tomography (CT). The results indicate that the converged bone architecture consisting of rods and plates are consistent with the natural bone morphology of the femur. The proposed model shows a promising means to understand the effects of different individual loading patterns on the bone density.

FIGURES IN THIS ARTICLE
<>
Copyright © 2015 by ASME
Topics: Stress , Bone , Stairs , Density , Rods
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Parfitt, A., 1983, “The Physiologic and Clinical Significance of Bone Histomorphometric Data,” Bone Histomorphometry: Techniques and Interpretation, CRC, Boca Raton, FL, p. 143.
Wolff, J., Maquet, P., and Furlong, R., 1986, The Law of Bone Remodelling, Springer, Berlin, Germany. [CrossRef]
Brekelmans, W., Poort, H., and Slooff, T., 1972, “A New Method to Analyse the Mechanical Behaviour of Skeletal Parts,” Acta Orthop., 43(5), pp. 301–317. [CrossRef]
Hart, R., Davy, D., and Heiple, K., 1984, “Mathematical Modeling and Numerical Solutions for Functionally Dependent Bone Remodeling,” Calcif. Tissue Int., 36(1), pp. S104–S109. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Carter, D., Fyhrie, D., and Whalen, R., 1987, “Trabecular Bone Density and Loading History: Regulation of Connective Tissue Biology by Mechanical Energy,” J. Biomech., 20(8), pp. 785–794. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Huiskes, R., Weinans, H., Grootenboer, H., Dalstra, M., Fudala, B., and Slooff, T., 1987, “Adaptive Bone-Remodeling Theory Applied to Prosthetic-Design Analysis,” J. Biomech., 20(11), pp. 1135–1150. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Marzban, A., Canavan, P., Warner, G., Vaziri, A., and Nayeb-Hashemi, H., 2012, “Parametric Investigation of Load-Induced Structure Remodeling in the Proximal Femur,” Proc. Inst. Mech. Eng., Part H, 226(6), pp. 450–460. [CrossRef]
Bitsakos, C., Kerner, J., Fisher, I., and Amis, A. A., 2005, “The Effect of Muscle Loading on the Simulation of Bone Remodelling in the Proximal Femur,” J. Biomech., 38(1), pp. 133–139. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Turner, A., Gillies, R., Sekel, R., Morris, P., Bruce, W., and Walsh, W., 2005, “Computational Bone Remodelling Simulations and Comparisons With DEXA Results,” J. Orthop. Res., 23(4), pp. 705–712. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Boyle, C., and Kim, I. Y., 2011, “Three-Dimensional Micro-Level Computational Study of Wolff's Law via Trabecular Bone Remodeling in the Human Proximal Femur Using Design Space Topology Optimization,” J. Biomech., 44(5), pp. 935–942. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Hambli, R., Lespessailles, E., and Benhamou, C.-L., 2013, “Integrated Remodeling-to-Fracture Finite Element Model of Human Proximal Femur Behaviour,” J. Mech. Behav. Biomed. Mater., 17, pp. 89–106. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Fyhrie, D., and Carter, D., 1986, “A Unifying Principle Relating Stress to Trabecular Bone Morphology,” J. Orthop. Res., 4(3), pp. 304–317. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Carter, D., Orr, T., and Fyhrie, D., 1989, “Relationships Between Loading History and Femoral Cancellous Bone Architecture,” J. Biomech., 22(3), pp. 231–244. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Adachi, T., Tomita, Y., Sakaue, H., and Tanaka, M., 1997, “Simulation of Trabecular Surface Remodeling Based on Local Stress Nonuniformity,” JSME Int. J. Ser. C, 40(4), pp. 782–792. [CrossRef]
Adachi, T., Tsubota, K.-I., Tomita, Y., and Hollister, S. J., 2001, “Trabecular Surface Remodeling Simulation for Cancellous Bone Using Microstructural Voxel Finite Element Models,” ASME J. Biomech. Eng., 123(5), pp. 403–409. [CrossRef]
Beaupré, G., Orr, T., and Carter, D., 1990, “An Approach for Time-Dependent Bone Modeling and Remodeling—Theoretical Development,” J. Orthop. Res., 8(5), pp. 651–661. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Cowin, S. C., 2001, Bone Mechanics Handbook, CRC, Boca Raton, FL.
Keaveny, T. M., Morgan, E. F., Niebur, G. L., and Yeh, O. C., 2001, “Biomechanics of Trabecular Bone,” Annu. Rev. Biomed. Eng., 3(1), pp. 307–333. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Sarikanat, M., and Yildiz, H., 2011, “Determination of Bone Density Distribution in Proximal Femur by Using the 3D Orthotropic Bone Adaptation Model,” Proc. Inst. Mech. Eng., Part H, 225(4), pp. 365–375. [CrossRef]
Miller, Z., Fuchs, M. B., and Arcan, M., 2002, “Trabecular Bone Adaptation With an Orthotropic Material Model,” J. Biomech., 35(2), pp. 247–256. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Ashman, R., Rho, J., and Turner, C., 1989, “Anatomical Variation of Orthotropic Elastic Moduli of the Proximal Human Tibia,” J. Biomech., 22(8), pp. 895–900. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Turner, C. H., Rho, J., Takano, Y., Tsui, T. Y., and Pharr, G. M., 1999, “The Elastic Properties of Trabecular and Cortical Bone Tissues are Similar: Results From Two Microscopic Measurement Techniques,” J. Biomech., 32(4), pp. 437–441. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Marzban, A., Nayeb-Hashemi, H., and Vaziri, A., 2013, “Numerical Simulation of Load-Induced Bone Structural Remodelling Using Stress-Limit Criterion,” Comput. Methods Biomech. Biomed. Eng., 18(3), pp. 259–268. [CrossRef]
Keyak, J. H., Rossi, S. A., Jones, K. A., and Skinner, H. B., 1997, “Prediction of Femoral Fracture Load Using Automated Finite Element Modeling,” J. Biomech., 31(2), pp. 125–133. [CrossRef]
Ethier, C. R., and Simmons, C. A., 2007, Introductory Biomechanics: From Cells to Organisms, Cambridge University, Cambridge, UK. [CrossRef]
Couteau, B., Labey, L., Hobatho, M., Vander Sloten, J., Arlaud, J., and Brignola, J., 1999, “Validation of a Three Dimensional Finite Element Model of a Femur With a Customized Hip Implant,” Comput. Methods Biomech. Biomed. Eng., 2(2), pp. 147–154.
Taylor, W., Roland, E., Ploeg, H., Hertig, D., Klabunde, R., Warner, M., Hobatho, M., Rakotomanana, L., and Clift, S., 2002, “Determination of Orthotropic Bone Elastic Constants Using FEA and Modal Analysis,” J. Biomech., 35(6), pp. 767–773. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Heller, M., Bergmann, G., Kassi, J.-P., Claes, L., Haas, N., and Duda, G., 2005, “Determination of Muscle Loading at the Hip Joint for Use in Pre-Clinical Testing,” J. Biomech., 38(5), pp. 1155–1163. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
El’Sheikh, H., MacDonald, B., and Hashmi, M., 2003, “Finite Element Simulation of the Hip Joint During Stumbling: A Comparison Between Static and Dynamic Loading,” J. Mater. Process. Technol., 143, pp. 249–255. [CrossRef]
Bergmann, G., Graichen, F., and Rohlmann, A., 1993, “Hip Joint Loading During Walking and Running, Measured in Two Patients,” J. Biomech., 26(8), pp. 969–990. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Lennon, A., McCormack, B., and Prendergast, P., 1998, “Development of a Physical Model of a Cemented Hip Replacement for Investigation of Cement Damage Accumulation,” J. Biomech., 31(Suppl. 1), p. 129. [CrossRef]
Homminga, J., McCreadie, B., Ciarelli, T., Weinans, H., Goldstein, S., and Huiskes, R., 2002, “Cancellous Bone Mechanical Properties From Normals and Patients With Hip Fractures Differ on the Structure Level, Not on the Bone Hard Tissue Level,” Bone, 30(5), pp. 759–764. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Keyak, J. H., and Falkinstein, Y., 2003, “Comparison of In Situ and In Vitro CT Scan-Based Finite Element Model Predictions of Proximal Femoral Fracture Load,” Med. Eng. Phys., 25(9), pp. 781–787. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Nazarian, A., von Stechow, D., Zurakowski, D., Müller, R., and Snyder, B. D., 2008, “Bone Volume Fraction Explains the Variation in Strength and Stiffness of Cancellous Bone Affected by Metastatic Cancer and Osteoporosis,” Calcif. Tissue Int., 83(6), pp. 368–379. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Van Rietbergen, B., Kabel, J., Odgaard, A., and Huiskes, R., 1997, “Determination of Trabecular Bone Tissue Elastic Properties by Comparison of Experimental and Finite Element Results,” Material Identification Using Mixed Numerical Experimental Methods, Springer, Netherlands, pp. 183–192. [CrossRef]
Ladd, A. J., Kinney, J. H., Haupt, D. L., and Goldstein, S. A., 1998, “Finite-Element Modeling of Trabecular Bone: Comparison With Mechanical Testing and Determination of Tissue Modulus,” J. Orthop. Res., 16(5), pp. 622–628. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Hou, F. J., Lang, S. M., Hoshaw, S. J., Reimann, D. A., and Fyhrie, D. P., 1998, “Human Vertebral Body Apparent and Hard Tissue Stiffness,” J. Biomech., 31(11), pp. 1009–1015. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Kabel, J., van Rietbergen, B., Dalstra, M., Odgaard, A., and Huiskes, R., 1999, “The Role of an Effective Isotropic Tissue Modulus in the Elastic Properties of Cancellous Bone,” J. Biomech., 32(7), pp. 673–680. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Baum, T., Carballido-Gamio, J., Huber, M., Müller, D., Monetti, R., Räth, C., Eckstein, F., Lochmüller, E., Majumdar, S., and Rummeny, E., 2010, “Automated 3D Trabecular Bone Structure Analysis of the Proximal Femur—Prediction of Biomechanical Strength by CT and DXA,” Osteoporosis Int., 21(9), pp. 1553–1564. [CrossRef]
Huber, M. B., Carballido-Gamio, J., Bauer, J. S., Baum, T., Eckstein, F., Lochmuller, E. M., Majumdar, S., and Link, T. M., 2008, “Proximal Femur Specimens: Automated 3D Trabecular Bone Mineral Density Analysis at Multidetector CT—Correlation With Biomechanical Strength Measurement 1,” Radiology, 247(2), pp. 472–481. [CrossRef] [PubMed]

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

Initial model of proximal femoral head before the start of the remodeling process: (a) Cortical bone and (b) trabecular bone structure

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

3D model of femur with muscle attachment sites and the direction of forces and coordinate system. (1) Hip contact, (2) abductor, (3) tensor fascia latae, proximal part, (4) tensor fascia latae, distal part, (5) ilio-tibial tract, proximal part, and (6) ilio-tibial tract, distal part. The magnitudes of forces for the three cases of loadings are shown in Table 1.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

Schematic flow chart of the remodeling process

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

Maximum principal stress contour in trabecular bone before adaptation process: (a) walking, (b) stair climbing, and (c) stumbling

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

Side views of converged trabecular structure for the stress range criteria of [1.5, 10] MPa (a) modeling material as transversely isotropic and (b) modeling material as isotropic. On the case of walking with transversely isotropic material, curved overlays indicate patterns of trabecular bone created in the direction of principal and secondary loading groups and the triangle at the femoral neck shows the Ward’s triangle.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 6

3D view of trabecular plates—bone subjected to (a) walking, (b) stair climbing, and (c) stumbling. For all the cases the transversely isotropic material has been used.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 7

Final architecture of trabecular bone showing the effect of various stress ranges on converged model for walking and stair climbing load cases. With (a) lower bound variations and (b) upper bound variations.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 8

Head, neck, and trochanter regions used to obtain bone volume fractions (BV/TV)

Tables

Errata

Discussions

Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging and repositioning the boxes below.

Related Journal Articles
Related eBook Content
Topic Collections

Sorry! You do not have access to this content. For assistance or to subscribe, please contact us:

  • TELEPHONE: 1-800-843-2763 (Toll-free in the USA)
  • EMAIL: asmedigitalcollection@asme.org
Sign In