The human mandibular condyle has a parasagittal plate-like trabecular structure. We tested the hypothesis that this structure reflects the mechanical loading of the condyle. We developed a finite element model of the condyle to analyze the strains occurring during static compressive loading. The principal strains in the trabecular bone were primarily oriented in the sagittal plane. The first component was compressive and oriented supero-inferiorly. The second component was negligibly small and oriented medio-laterally. The third component was tensile, oriented antero-posteriorly, and almost equal to the compressive strain. This tensile strain was caused by antero-posterior bulging of the cortex. This means that the trabecular structure is also subjected to significant tensile forces. The orientation of the parasagittal strains followed the direction of the applied load. It was concluded that the trabecular structure of the mandibular condyle is optimal in resisting the compressive and tensile strains to which it is subjected.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Beek M, Koolstra JH, Van Ruijven LJ, Van Eijden TM -2000-. Three-dimensional finite element analysis of the human temporomandibular joint disc. J Biomech33:307–316.
2.
Carter DR, Hayes WC -1977-. The compressive behavior of bone as a two-phase porous structure. J Bone Joint Surg Am59:954–962.
3.
Carter DR, Orr TG, Fyhrie DP -1989-. Relationships between loading history and femoral cancellous bone architecture. J Biomech22:231–244.
4.
Giesen EB, Van Eijden TM -2000-. The three-dimensional cancellous bone architecture of the human mandibular condyle. J Dent Res79:957–963.
5.
Giesen EB, Ding M, Dalstra M, Van Eijden TM -2001-. Mechanical properties of cancellous bone in the human mandibular condyle are anisotropic. J Biomech34:799–803.
6.
Hoppe H -1994-. Surface reconstruction from unorganized points -dissertation-. Seattle, WA: Univ. of Washington.
7.
Huiskes R, Weinans H, Grootenboer HJ, Dalstra M, Fudala B, Slooff TJ -1987-. Adaptive bone-remodeling theory applied to prosthetic-design analysis. J Biomech20:1135–1150.
8.
Huiskes R, Ruimerman R, Van Lenthe GH, Janssen JD -2000-. Effects of mechanical forces on maintenance and adaptation of form in trabecular bone. Nature405:704–706.
9.
Hylander WL, Johnson KR -1992-. Strain gradients in the craniofacial region of primates. In: The biological mechanism of tooth movement and craniofacial adaptation. Davidovitch Z, editor. Columbus: The Ohio State University, pp. 559-569.
10.
Hylander WL, Johnson KR -1997-. In vivo bone strain patterns in the craniofacial region of primates. In: Science and practice of occlusion. McNeill C, editor. Chicago: Quintessence Publishing Co Inc., pp. 165-178.
11.
Judex S, Gross TS, Bray RC, Zernicke RF -1997-. Adaptation of bone to physiological stimuli. J Biomech30:421–429.
12.
Kabel J, Van Rietbergen B, Odgaard A, Huiskes R -1999-. Constitutive relationships of fabric, density, and elastic properties in cancellous bone architecture. Bone25:481–486.
13.
Klein-Nulend J, Semeins CM, Ajubi NE, Nijweide PJ, Burger EH -1995-. Pulsating fluid flow increases nitric oxide -NO- synthesis by osteocytes but not periosteal fibroblasts—correlation with prostaglandin upregulation. Biochem Biophys Res Commun217:640–648.
14.
Koolstra JH, Van Eijden TM, Weijs WA, Naeije M -1988-. A three-dimensional mathematical model of the human masticatory system predicting maximum possible bite forces. J Biomech21:563–576.
15.
Korioth TW, Romilly DP, Hannam AG -1992-. Three-dimensional finite element stress analysis of the dentate human mandible. Am J Phys Anthropol88:69–96.
16.
Miki c’ B, Carter DR -1995-. Bone strain gage data and theoretical models of functional adaptation. J Biomech28:465–469.
17.
Mosley JR, Lanyon LE -1998-. Strain rate as a controlling influence on adaptive modeling in response to dynamic loading of the ulna in growing male rats. Bone23:313–318.
18.
Mullender M, Van Rietbergen B, Rüegsegger P, Huiskes R -1998-. Effect of mechanical set point of bone cells on mechanical control of trabecular bone architecture. Bone22:125–131.
19.
Rho JY, Ashman RB, Turner CH -1993-. Young’s modulus of trabecular and cortical bone material: ultrasonic and microtensile measurements. J Biomech26:111–119.
20.
Schweitzer JE -1996-. Analysis and application of subdivision surfaces -dissertation-. Seattle, WA: Univ. of Washington.
21.
Smit TH, Burger EH -2000-. Is BMU-coupling a strain-regulated phenomenon— A finite element analysis. J Bone Miner Res15:301–307.
22.
Smit TH, Odgaard A, Schneider E -1997-. Structure and function of vertebral trabecular bone. Spine22:2823–2833.
23.
Turner CH, Anne V, Pidaparti RM -1997-. A uniform strain criterion for trabecular bone adaptation: do continuum-level strain gradients drive adaptation? J Biomech30:555–563.
24.
Van Ruijven LJ, Beek M, Van Eijden TM -1999-. Fitting parametrized polynomials with scattered surface data. J Biomech32:715–720.
25.
Van Ruijven LJ, Beek M, Donker E, Van Eijden TM -2000-. The accuracy of joint surface models constructed from data obtained with an electromagnetic tracking device. J Biomech33:1023–1028.
26.
Wachtel EF, Keaveny TM -1997-. Dependence of trabecular damage on mechanical strain. J Orthop Res15:781–787.
27.
Weinans H, Huiskes R, Grootenboer HJ -1992-. The behaviour of adaptive bone-remodeling simulation models. J Biomech25:1425–1441.
28.
Wolff J -1892-. Das Gesetz der Transformation der Knochen. Berlin: Hirschwald.
