scholarly journals Simulation of fracture strength improvements of a human proximal femur using finite element analysis.

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Waleed Alim
Keyword(s):  
Finite Element Analysis ◽  
Finite Element ◽  
Fracture Strength ◽  
Proximal Femur ◽  
Element Analysis

Finite Element Analysis of Proximal Femur QCT Scans for the Assessment of Hip Fracture Risk In Older Men

2008 ◽  
Vol 11 (3) ◽  
pp. 467-468 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tony M. Keaveny ◽  
Lynn M. Marshall ◽  
Carrie M. Nielson ◽  
Steven R. Cummings ◽  
Paul F. Hoffmann ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Finite Element Analysis ◽  
Finite Element ◽  
Hip Fracture ◽  
Fracture Risk ◽  
Proximal Femur ◽  
Older Men ◽  
Element Analysis ◽  
Hip Fracture Risk

scholarly journals Patient-Specific Phantomless Estimation of Bone Mineral Density and Its Effects on Finite Element Analysis Results: A Feasibility Study

2019 ◽  
Vol 2019 ◽  
pp. 1-10 ◽  
Author(s):  
Young Han Lee ◽  
Jung Jin Kim ◽  
In Gwun Jang
Keyword(s):  
Bone Mineral Density ◽  
Finite Element Analysis ◽  
Finite Element ◽  
Lumbar Spine ◽  
Regression Model ◽  
Proximal Femur ◽  
Strain Energy ◽  
Mineral Density ◽  
Element Analysis ◽  
Reference Phantom

Objectives. This study proposes a regression model for the phantomless Hounsfield units (HU) to bone mineral density (BMD) conversion including patient physical factors and analyzes the accuracy of the estimated BMD values. Methods. The HU values, BMDs, circumferences of the body, and cross-sectional areas of bone were measured from 39 quantitative computed tomography images of L2 vertebrae and hips. Then, the phantomless HU-to-BMD conversion was derived using a multiple linear regression model. For the statistical analysis, the correlation between the estimated BMD values and the reference BMD values was evaluated using Pearson’s correlation test. Voxelwise BMD and finite element analysis (FEA) results were analyzed in terms of root-mean-square error (RMSE) and strain energy density, respectively. Results. The HU values and circumferences were statistically significant (p<0.05) for the lumbar spine, whereas only the HU values were statistically significant (p<0.05) for the proximal femur. The BMD values estimated using the proposed HU-to-BMD conversion were significantly correlated with those measured using the reference phantom: Pearson’s correlation coefficients of 0.998 and 0.984 for the lumbar spine and proximal femur, respectively. The RMSEs of the estimated BMD values for the lumbar spine and hip were 4.26 ± 0.60 (mg/cc) and 8.35 ± 0.57 (mg/cc), respectively. The errors of total strain energy were 1.06% and 0.91%, respectively. Conclusions. The proposed phantomless HU-to-BMD conversion demonstrates the potential of precisely estimating BMD values from CT images without the reference phantom and being utilized as a viable tool for FEA-based quantitative assessment using routine CT images.

Finite element analysis of a bone-implant system with the proximal femur nail

2006 ◽  
Vol 14 (4-5) ◽  
pp. 411-419 ◽  
Author(s):  
P. Helwig ◽  
G. Faust ◽  
U. Hindenlang ◽  
B. Kröplin ◽  
C. Eingartner
Keyword(s):  
Finite Element Analysis ◽  
Finite Element ◽  
Proximal Femur ◽  
Element Analysis ◽  
Bone Implant ◽  
Implant System ◽  
Proximal Femur Nail

scholarly journals Finite Element Analysis of the Proximal Femur and Hip Fracture Risk in Older Men

2009 ◽  
Vol 24 (3) ◽  
pp. 475-483 ◽  
Author(s):  
Eric S Orwoll ◽  
Lynn M Marshall ◽  
Carrie M Nielson ◽  
Steven R Cummings ◽  
Jodi Lapidus ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Finite Element Analysis ◽  
Finite Element ◽  
Hip Fracture ◽  
Fracture Risk ◽  
Proximal Femur ◽  
Older Men ◽  
Element Analysis ◽  
Hip Fracture Risk
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document