Macro-level failure in bone structure could be diagnosed by pain or physical examination. However, diagnosing tissue-level failure in a timely manner is challenging due to the difficulty in observing the interior mechanical environment of bone tissue. Because most fractures begin with tissue-level failure in bone tissue caused by continually applied loading, people attempt to monitor the tissue-level failure of bone and provide corresponding measures to prevent fracture. Many tissue-level mechanical parameters of bone could be predicted or measured; however, the value of the parameter may vary among different specimens belonging to a kind of bone structure even at the same age and anatomical site. These variations cause difficulty in representing tissue-level bone failure. Therefore, determining an appropriate tissue-level failure evaluation standard is necessary to represent tissue-level bone failure. In this study, the yield and failure processes of rat femoral cortical bones were primarily simulated through a hybrid computational–experimental method. Subsequently, the tissue-level strains and the ratio between tissue-level failure and yield strains in cortical bones were predicted. The results indicated that certain differences existed in tissue-level strains; however, slight variations in the ratio were observed among different cortical bones. Therefore, the ratio between tissue-level failure and yield strains for a kind of bone structure could be determined. This ratio may then be regarded as an appropriate tissue-level failure evaluation standard to represent the mechanical status of bone tissue.
SiLWinzenbergTMJiangQet al. Projection of osteoporosis-related fractures and costs in China: 2010-2050. Osteoporos Int2015; 26(7): 1929–1937.
2.
MirzaeiMKeshavarzianMNaeiniV. Analysis of strength and failure pattern of human proximal femur using quantitative computed tomography (QCT)-based finite element method. Bone2014; 64: 108–114.
3.
ChenHZhouXShoumuraSet al. Age- and gender-dependent changes in three-dimensional microstructure of cortical and trabecular bone at the human femoral neck. Osteoporos Int2010; 21(4): 627–636.
4.
ZhangRGongHFangJet al. Prediction of proximal femoral fracture in sideways falls using nonlinear dynamic finite element analysis. J Mech Med Biol2014; 14(2): 1450026.
5.
AliAACristofoliniLSchileoEet al. Specimen-specific modeling of hip fracture pattern and repair. J Biomech2014; 47(2): 536–543.
6.
KoivumäkiJEMThevenotJPulkkinenPet al. Cortical bone finite element models in the estimation of experimentally measured failure loads in the proximal femur. Bone2012; 51(4): 737–740.
7.
KoivumäkiJEMThevenotJPulkkinenPet al. Ct-based finite element models can be used to estimate experimentally measured failure loads in the proximal femur. Bone2012; 50(4): 824–829.
8.
MullinsLPBruzziMSMcHughPE. Calibration of a constitutive model for the post-yield behaviour of cortical bone. J Mech Behav Biomed Mater2009; 2: 460–470.
9.
HommingaJMccreadieBRCiarelliTEet al. Cancellous bone mechanical properties from normals and patients with hip fractures differ on the structure level, not on the bone hard tissue level. Bone2002; 30(5): 759–764.
10.
CarrettaRStussiEMullerRet al. Within subject heterogeneity in tissue-level post-yield mechanical and material properties in human trabecular bone. J Mech Behav Biomed Mater2013; 24: 64–73.
11.
CyganikLBinkowskiMKokotGet al. Prediction of Young’s modulus of trabeculae in microscale using macro-scale’s relationships between bone density and mechanical properties. J Mech Behav Biomed Mater2014; 36: 120–134.
12.
BayraktarHHMorganEFNieburGLet al. Comparison of the elastic and yield properties of human femoral trabecular and cortical bone tissue. J Biomech2004; 37(1): 27–35.
13.
GongHZhangMFanYB. Micro-finite element analysis of trabecular bone yield behavior—effects of tissue nonlinear material properties. J Mech Med Biol2011; 11(3): 563–580.
14.
MacNeilJABoydSK. Bone strength at the distal radius can be estimated from high-resolution peripheral quantitative computed tomography and the finite element method. Bone2008; 42(6): 1203–1213.
15.
MorganEFBayraktarHHYehOCet al. Contribution of inter-site variations in architecture to trabecular bone apparent yield strains. J Biomech2004; 37(9): 1413–1420.
16.
NieburGLFeldsteinMJYuenJCet al. High-resolution finite element models with tissue strength asymmetry accurately predict failure of trabecular bone. J Biomech2000; 33(12): 1575–1583.
17.
YangHSButzKDDuffyDet al. Characterization of cancellous and cortical bone strain in the in vivo mouse tibial loading model using microCT-based finite element analysis. Bone2014; 66: 131–139.
18.
LiSDemirciESilberschmidtVV. Variability and anisotropy of mechanical behavior of cortical bone in tension and compression. J Mech Behav Biomed Mater2013; 21: 109–120.
19.
GrayHAZavatskyABTaddeiFet al. Experimental validation of a finite element model of a composite tibia. Proc IMechE, Part H: J Engineering in Medicine2006; 221(3): 315–323.
20.
ChappardDBasléMFLegrandEet al. New laboratory tools in the assessment of bone quality. Osteoporos Int2011; 22(8): 2225–2240.
21.
ZhangRGongHZhuDet al. Seven day insertion rest in whole body vibration improves multi-level bone quality in tail suspension rats. PLoS ONE2014; 9(3): e92312.
22.
HambliR. Micro-CT finite element model and experimental validation of trabecular bone damage and fracture. Bone2013; 56(2): 363–374.
23.
Van Der LindenJCHommingaJVerhaarJANet al. Mechanical consequences of bone loss in cancellous bone. J Bone Miner Res2001; 16(3): 457–465.
24.
MarcoMRodriguez-MillanMSantiusteCet al. A review on recent advances in numerical modelling of bone cutting. J Mech Behav Biomed Mater2015; 44: 179–201.
25.
VilayphiouNBoutroySSornay-renduEet al. Finite element analysis performed on radius and tibia HR-pQCT images and fragility fractures at all sites in postmenopausal women. Bone2010; 46(4): 1030–1037.
26.
ZhangRGongHZhuDet al. Multi-level femoral morphology and mechanical properties of rats of different ages. Bone2015; 76: 76–87.
27.
FanZSwadenerJGRhoJYet al. Anisotropic properties of human tibial cortical bone as measured by nanoindentation. J Orthop Res2002; 20(4): 806–810.
28.
FeerickEMLiuXYMcGarryP. Anisotropic mode-dependent damage of cortical bone using the extended finite element method (XFEM). J Mech Behav Biomed Mater2013; 20: 77–89.
29.
LughmaniWABouazza-MaroufKAshcroftI. Drilling in cortical bone: a finite element model and experimental investigations. J Mech Behav Biomed Mater2015; 42: 32–42.
30.
KellyNMcGarryJP. Experimental and numerical characterisation of the elasto-plastic properties of bovine trabecular bone and a trabecular bone analogue. J Mech Behav Biomed Mater2012; 9: 184–197.
31.
HarrisonNMMcDonnellPMullinsLet al. Failure modelling of trabecular bone using a non-linear combined damage and fracture voxel finite element approach. Biomech Model Mechanobiol2013; 12(2): 225–241.
32.
QasimMNatarajanRNAnHSet al. Damage accumulation location under cyclic loading in the lumbar disc shifts from inner annulus lamellae to peripheral annulus with increasing disc degeneration. J Biomech2014; 47(1): 24–31.
33.
FanRXGongHZhangRet al. Quantification of age-related tissue-level failure strains of rat femoral cortical bones using an approach combining macrocompressive test and microfinite element analysis. J Biomech Eng2016; 138(4): 041006.
34.
CostaMCTozziGCristofoliniLet al. Micro finite element models of the vertebral body: validation of local displacement predictions. PLoS ONE2017; 12(7): e0180151.
35.
MorganEFKeavenyTM. Dependence of yield strain of human trabecular bone on anatomic site. J Biomech2001; 34(5): 569–577.
36.
YeniYNFyhrieDP. A rate-dependent microcrack-bridging model that can explain the strain rate dependency of cortical bone apparent yield strength. J Biomech2003; 36(9): 1343–1353.
37.
GongHFanYBZhangMet al. Age- and direction-related adaptations of lumbar vertebral trabecular bone with respect to apparent stiffness and tissue level stress distribution. Acta Mech Sinica2005; 25(1): 121–129.
38.
SchileoETaddeiFCristofoliniLet 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. J Biomech2008; 41(2): 356–367.
39.
ConnorDTOElkhodaryKIFouadYet al. Modeling orthotropic elasticity, localized plasticity and fracture in trabecular bone. Comput Mech2016; 58(3): 423–439.
40.
FanRXGongHZhangXBet al. Modeling the mechanical consequences of age-related trabecular bone loss by XFEM simulation. Comput Math Method M2016; 2016: 3495152.
41.
WittekAGroslandNMJoldesGRet al. From finite element meshes to clouds of points: a review of methods for generation of computational biomechanics models for patient-specific applications. Ann Biomed Eng2015; 44(1): 3–15.
42.
RiggsBLMeltonLJRobbRAet al. Population-based study of age and sex differences in bone volumetric density, size, geometry, and structure at different skeletal sites. J Bone Miner Res2004; 19(12): 1945–1954.
