The mechanism of cerebrospinal fluid in mitigating closed head injuries caused by mild impacts was investigated by finite-element modeling. Three biomechanical models were constructed. In these models, cerebrospinal fluid was considered as a soft solid material, an inviscid fluid without intracranial pressure, and an inviscid fluid with normal intracranial pressure, respectively, while other conditions such as the finite-element mesh, the impact, and the boundary conditions were kept the same. The recently developed nearest nodes finite-element method was adopted to deal with large deformations in brain tissue. Results obtained from the numerical studies showed that cerebrospinal fluid was able to remarkably reduce the maximum peak strains, especially the shear strains induced by impacts and transmitted to the brain. Cerebrospinal fluid with intracranial pressure was able to further buffer relative oscillations between the skull and the brain.
FaulMXuLWaldM. Traumatic brain injury in the United States: emergency department visits, hospitalizations, and deaths. Technical report, 2010. Atlanta, GA: Centers for disease control and prevention, National Center for Injury Prevention and Control.
2.
GoldsmithW. The state of head injury biomechanics: past, present, and future: Part 1. Crit Rev Biomed Eng2001; 29: 441–600.
3.
GoldsmithWMonsonKL. The state of head injury biomechanics: past, present, and future. Part 2: physical experimentation. Crit Rev Biomed Eng2005; 33: 105–207.
4.
HolbournA. Mechanics of head injuries. Lancet1943; 2: 438–441.
5.
HardyCMarcalP. Elastic analysis of a skull. J Appl Mech1973; 40: 838–842.
6.
ChanH. Mathematical model for closed head impact. In Proceedings of the 18th Stapp car crash conference, Ann Arbor, dec 4–5, 1974, pp.557–578.
7.
NickellRMarcalP. In vacuo model dynamic response of the human skull. J Eng Ind1974; 4: 490–494.
8.
KhalilTVianoD. Critical issues in finite element modeling of head impact. In: Proceedings of Stapp car crash conference, Ann Arbor, MI, 1982, Warrendale, PA, USA: SAE. pp.87–102.
9.
RuanJKhalilTKingA. Human head dynamic response to side impact by finite element modeling. J Biomech Eng-T ASME1991; 113: 276–283.
10.
KormiKEtheridgeR. Application of the finite-element method to simulation of damage to the human skull as a consequence of missile impact on a multi-layered composite crash helmet. J Biomed Eng1992; 14: 203–208.
11.
LovasA. Mechanical models of the human skull brain system. Acta Tech Hung1995; 107: 83–98.
12.
HuangH-MLeeM-C. Three-dimensional finite element analysis of brain contusion. Chin J Med Biol Eng1995; 15: 127–141.
13.
KuijpersAClaessensMSaurenA. A two-dimensional FEM analysis of the response of the human head to impact: the importance of boundary conditions. In: Computer methods in biomechanics and biomedical engineering. Swansea: CRC Press, 1996, pp.207–216.
14.
MehtaBMulabagulaRPatelJ. Finite element analysis of the human skull considering the brain and bone material properties. In: Computer methods in biomechanics and biomedical engineering. Swansea: CRC Press, 1996, pp.217–227.
15.
VooLKumaresanSPintarF. Finite-element models of the human head. Med Biol Eng Comput1996; 34: 375–381.
16.
GilchristMO’DonoghueD. Simulation of the development of frontal head impact injury. Comput Mech2000; 26: 229–235.
17.
MotaAKlugWOrtizM. Finite-element simulation of firearm injury to the human cranium. Comput Mech2003; 31: 115–121.
18.
WillingerRBaumgartnerD. Numerical and physical modelling of the human head under impact—towards new injury criteria. Int J Vehicle Des2003; 32: 94–115.
19.
JirousekOJiraJ. Comparison of finite element and experimental simulation of human head response to impact. VDI Berichte2005; 1899: 463–472.
20.
AareMKleivenS. Evaluation of head response to ballistic helmet impacts using the finite element method. Int J Impact Eng2007; 34: 596–608.
21.
ZhangJYoganandanNPintarF. Experimental study on non-exit ballistic induced traumatic brain injury. In: Proceedings of the ASME summer bioengineering conference. Keystone, CO, 2007, pp.605–606. New York: American Society of Mechanical.
22.
GongSLeeHLuC. Dynamic response of a human head to a foreign object impact. IEEE T Bio-Med Eng2008; 55: 1226–1229.
23.
GongSLeeHLuC. Computational simulation of the human head response to non-contact impact. Comput Struct2008; 86: 758–770.
24.
ThompsonRRivaraFThompsonD. A case control study of the effectiveness of bicycle safety helmets. New Engl J Med1989; 320: 1361–1367.
25.
CurnowW. The efficacy of bicycle helmets against brain injury. Accident Anal Prev2003; 35: 287–292.
26.
ShealyJEJohnsonRJEttlingerCF. Do helmets reduce fatalities or merely alter the patterns of death?J ASTM Int2009; 5(10): 39–42.
27.
RousseauPPostAHoshizakiT. A comparison of peak linear and angular headform accelerations using ice hockey helmets. J ASTM Int2009; 6: 11.
28.
BishopPArnoldJ. The effectiveness of hockey helmets in limiting localized loading on the head. In: CastaldiCRBishopPJHoernerEF (eds) Safety in ice hockey. ASTM Special Technical Publication No. 1212, 1993, pp.175–182. Pittsburgh, PA: ASTM.
29.
McGuineTNassS. Football helmet fitting errors in Wisconsin high school players. In: HoernerF (ed.) Safety in American football. ASTM Special Technical Publication No. 1305, 1997, pp.83–88. Phoenix, AZ: ASTM.
30.
PfefferbaumAZatzLJerniganT. Computer-interactive method for quantifying cerebrospinal fluid and tissue in brain CT scans: effects of aging. J Comput Assist Tom1986; 10(4): 571–578.
31.
SteinerLAndrewsP. Monitoring the injured brain: ICP and CBF. Brit J Anaesth2006; 97: 26–38.
32.
HalabiehOWanJ. Simulating mechanism of brain injury during closed head impact. In: Biomedical simulation proceedings 4th international symposium. London: ISBMS, 2008, pp.107–118.
33.
IvarssonJVianoDLovsundP. Strain relief from the cerebral ventricles during head impact: experimental studies on natural protection of the brain. J Biomech2000; 33: 181–189.
34.
LuoYZhangQBigioMRD. Recent progress in application of FEM in study of non-penetrating brain injuries. Adv Theor Appl Mech2008; 1: 225–240.
35.
McElhaneyJFogleJMelvinJ. Mechanical properties of cranial bone. J Biomech1970; 3: 495–512.
36.
McElhaneyJMelvinJRobertsV. Dynamic characteristics of the tissue of the head. In: KenediR (ed.) Perspectives in biomedical engineering. Baltimore, MD: University Park Press, 1973, pp.215–228.
37.
McElhaneyJStalnakerRRobertsV. Biomechanical aspects of head injury. In: KingWFMertzHJ (eds) Human impact response. 1973, pp.85–112.
38.
DassiosGKiriakopoulosMKostopoulosV. On the sensitivity of the vibrational response of the human head. Comput Mech1998; 21: 382–388.
39.
MendisKStalnakerRAdvaniS. A constitutive relationship for large deformation finite element modeling of brain tissue. J Biomech Eng1995; 117: 279–285.
40.
NahumASmithRWardC. Intracranial pressure dynamics during head impact. In: Proceedings of the 21st Stapp car crash conference, SAE paper no. 770922, 1977.
41.
RuanJKhalilTKingA. Dynamic response of the human head to impact by three-dimensional finite element analysis. J Biomech Eng1994; 116: 44–50.
42.
KleivenS. Finite element modeling of the human head. PhD Thesis, Royal Institute of Technology, Stockholm, Sweden, 2002.
43.
HorganTGilchristM. The creation of three-dimensional finite element models for simulating head impact biomechanics. Int J Crashworthines2003; 8: 353–366.
44.
LubockPGoldsmithW. Experimental cavitation studies in a model head-neck system. J Biomech1980; 13(12): 1041–1052.
45.
ZouHSchmiedelerJ. Predicting brain injury under impact with a strain measure from analytical models. Int J Crashworthines2008; 13: 337–348.
46.
PrangeMMarguliesS. Tissue strain thresholds for axonal injury in the infant brain. In: KammR (ed.) Bioengineering conference, vol. 50. Snowbird, UT: American Society of Mechanical Engineers, Bioengineering Division, 2001, pp.833–834.
47.
Sotudeh ChafiMDirisalaVKaramiG. A finite element method parametric study of the dynamic response of the human brain with different cerebrospinal fluid constitutive properties. P I Mech Eng H223(H8): 2009; 1003–1019.
48.
ChuC-SLinM-SHuangH-M. Finite element analysis of cerebral contusion. J Biomech1994; 27: 187–194.
49.
HardyWNKhalilTBKingAI. Literature review on head injury biomechanics. Int J Impact Eng1994; 15: 561–586.
50.
HoJKleivenS. Dynamic response of the brain with vasculature: a three-dimensional computational study. J Biomech2007; 40: 3006–3012.
51.
JirousekOJirovaJJiraJ. Development and validation of FE model of human head in frontal impact. In: Proceedings of the fourth IASTED international conference on biomechanics, Palma de Mallorca, Spain, 28–29 Aug., 2006, p.6. ACTA Press, Anaheim, CA, USA.
52.
KleivenS. Evaluation of head injury criteria using a finite element model validated against experiments on localized brain motion, intracerebral acceleration, and intracranial pressure. Int J Crashworthines2006; 11: 5–79.
53.
RuanJPrasadP. Skull isostress and brain isostrain responses of a finite element human head model. In: Proceedings of the 1995 Bioengineering conference, June 28, 1995–July 2 1995, Beever Creek, CO, USA. pp.319–320.
54.
RuanS-JWangX-KLiuW-L. Study on the sensitivity of cranial materials and their responses to the infrancranial pressure during head impact. Chin J Biomed Eng2004; 23: 52–258.
55.
UenoJWMelvinMERouhanaJW. Two-dimensional finite element model of the cortical impact method for mechanical brain injury, vol. 126. New York: American Society of Mechanical Engineers, Applied Mechanics1991, pp.121–154.
56.
WillingerRKangH-SDiawB. Three-dimensional human head finite-element model validation against two experimental impacts. Ann Biomed Eng1999; 27(3): 403–410.
57.
YangKHKingAI. A limited review of finite element models developed for brain injury biomechanics research. Int J Vehicle Des2003; 32: 16–29.
58.
ZienkiewiczOCTaylorRLZhuJZ. The finite element method: its basis and fundamentals. Oxford: Elsevier Butterworth-Heinemann, 2005.
59.
McElhaneyJMelvinJRobertsV. Dynamic characteristics of the tissues of the head. In: KenediR (ed.), Perspectives in biomedical engineering. Baltimore, MD: University Park Press, 1973, pp.215–228.
60.
El SayedTMotaAFraternaliF. Biomechanics of traumatic brain injury. Comput Method Appl M2008; 197: 692–4701.
61.
GalfordJMcElhaneyJ. A viscoelastic study of scalp, brain and dura. J Biomech1970; 3: 11–221.
62.
Al-BsharatAZhouCYangKH. Intracranial pressure in the human head due to frontal impact based on a finite element model. In: vol. 42, Fairfield, NJ: American Society of Mechanical Engineers, Bioengineering Division, ASME, 1999, pp.113–114.
63.
UenoKMelvinJW. Finite element model study of head impact based on hybrid iii head acceleration: the effects of rotational and translational acceleration. J Biomech Eng-T ASME1995; 117: 319–328.
SussmanTBatheK. A finite element formulation for nonlinear incompressible elastic and inelastic analysis. Comput Struct26: 987; 357–409.
66.
DavisJ. Wave propagation in solids and fluids. New York: Springer-Verlag, 1988.
67.
LuoY. A nearest-nodes finite element method with local multivariate lagrange interpolation. Finite Elem Anal Des2008; 44: 97–803.
68.
LuoY. 3D nearest-nodes finite element method for solid continuum analysis. Adv Theor Appl Mech2008; 1: 31–139.
69.
LuoY. Dealing with extremely large deformation by nearest-nodes FEM with algorithm for updating element connectivity. Int J Solids Struct2008; 45: 5074–5087.
70.
LuoY. An effective way for dealing with element distortion by nearest-nodes FEM. Int J Numer Method Biomed Eng2010; 26: 1125–1129.
71.
LeestmaJ. Forensic neuropathology. New York: Raven Press, 1987.
