Bone drilling is a major part of modern orthopaedic surgery which involves the internal fixation of fractured bones. The investigation of bone drilling described in this paper demonstrates the contribution of automation technology towards the study of bone strength. The aim of this preliminary investigation is to establish a relationship between bone drilling forces and measurements of bone mineral density (BMD) by dual energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA). A linear relationship with a high coefficient of correlation has been found between average drilling forces and BMD measurements at both the greater trochanter and the femoral head of porcine femurs when drilling in the anterior-posterior (AP) direction (i.e. the direction of the DXA scan). It has also been found that in the normal drilling direction (i.e. in the cervical axis direction), which is orthogonal to the DXA scanning direction, there are similar trends between the drilling forces and BMD levels in regions where bone density is more consistent (e.g. the femoral head). The findings of this investigation indicate that analysis of bone drilling forces has the potential to provide useful information about the strength of bone.
FarnworthG. H.BurtonJ. A.Optimization of drill geometry for orthopaedic surgery. In Proceedings of the 14th International Conference on Machine Tool Design and Research, Manchester, 1974, paper 28, pp. 227–233.
2.
JacobsC. H.BerryJ. T.PopeM. H.HoaglundF. T.A study of the bone machining process—drilling. J. Biomechanics, 1976, 9, 343–349.
3.
WigginsK. L.MalkinsS.Drilling of bone. J. Biomechanics, 1976, 9, 553–559.
4.
SahaS.PalS.AlbrightJ. A.Surgical drilling: Design and performance of an improved drill. Trans. ASME, J. Biomech. Engng, 1982, 104, 245–252.
5.
OngF. R.Bouazza-MaroufK.Drilling of bone: A robust automatic method for the detection of drill bit break-through. Proc. Instn Mech. Engrs, Part H, Journal of Engineering in Medicine, 1998, 212 (H3), 209–221.
6.
AllottaB.BelmonteF.BosioL.DarioP.A mechatronic tool for drilling in orthopaedics. In Proceedings of the Second International Workshop on Mechatronics in Medicine and Surgery, Bristol, 1995, pp. 92–107.
7.
EvansF. G.Mechanical Properties of Bone, 1973 (Charles C. Thomas Publisher, Springfield, Illinois).
8.
FaulknerK. G.GlüerC. C.MajumdarS.LangP.EngelkeK.GenantH. K.Noninvasive measurements of bone mass, structure, and strength: Current methods and experimental techniques. Am. J. Roentgenol., 1991, 157, 1229–1237.
9.
WahnerH. W.FogelmanI.The Evaluation of Osteoporosis: Dual Energy X-Ray Absorptiometry in Clinical Practice, 1995 (Martin Dunitz, London).
10.
YamadaH.Strength of Biological Materials (Ed. EvansF. G.), 1970, pp. 19–80 (Williams and Wilkins, Baltimore).
11.
CooperC.Bone mass throughout life: Bone growth and involution. In Osteoporosis: Pathogenesis and Management (Ed. FrancisR. M.), 1990, pp. 1–26 (Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, Netherlands).
12.
BrownT. D.FergusonA. B.Mechanical properties distributions in the cancellous bone of the human proximal femur. Acta Ortho. Scand., 1980, 51, 429–437.
13.
GoldsteinS. A.The mechanical properties of trabecular bone: Dependence of anatomic location and function. J. Biomechanics, 1987, 20, 1055–1061.
14.
MartensR.Van AudekerckeR.DelportP.De MeesterP.MulierJ. C.The mechanical characteristics of cancellous bone at the upper femoral region. J. Biomechanics, 1983, 16, 971–983.
15.
HodgskinsonR.CurreyJ. D.Separate effects of osteoporosis and density on strength and stiffness of human cancellous bone. Clin. Biomechanics, 1993, 9, 262–268.
16.
KellerT. S.Predicting the compressive mechanical behaviour of bone. J. Biomechanics, 1994, 27, 1159–1168.
17.
RiceJ. C.CowinS. C.BowmanJ. A.On the dependence of the elasticity and strength of cancellous bone on apparent density. J. Biomechanics, 1998, 21, 155–168.
18.
BrearK.CurreyJ. D.RainesS.SmithK. J.Density and temperature effects on some mechanical properties of cancellous bone. Engng in Medicine, 1988, 17, 163–167.
19.
LindeF.HvidI.MadsenF.The effect of specimen geometry on the mechanical behaviour of trabecular bone specimens. J. Biomechanics, 1992, 25, 359–368.
20.
KeavenyT. M.BorchersR. E.GibsonL. J.HayesW. C.Trabecular bone modulus and strength can depend on specimen geometry. J. Biomechanics, 1993, 26, 991–1000.
21.
MarshallD.JohnellO.WedelH.Meta-analysis of how well measures of bone mineral density predict occurrence of osteoporotic fractures. Br. Med. J., 1996, 312, 1254–1259.
22.
De LaetC. E.D.H.van HoutB. A.BurgerH.HofmanA.PolsH. A. P.Bone density and risk of hip fractures in men and women: Cross sectional analysis. Br. Med. J., 1997, 315, 221–225.
DuboefF.JergasM.SchottA. M.WuC. Y.GlüerC. C.GenantH. K.A comparison of bone densito-metry measurements of the central skeleton in post-menopausal women with and without vertebral fracture. Br. J. Radial., 1995, 68, 747–753.
25.
MorisM.PeretzA.TjekaR.NegabanN.WoutersM.BergmannP.Quantitative ultrasound bone measurements: Normal values and comparison with bone mineral density by dual X-ray absorptiometry. Calcif. Tissue Int., 1995, 57, 6–10.
26.
CunninghamJ. L.FordhamJ. N.HewittT. A.SpeedC. A.Ultrasound velocity and attenuation at different skeletal sites compared with bone mineral density measured using dual energy X-ray absorptiometry. Br. J. Radiol., 1996, 69, 25–32.
27.
LeichterI.SimkinA.MarguliesJ. Y.BivasA.RomanI.DeutschD.WeinrebA.Can the weight-bearing capacity of the femoral neck be estimated by physical measurements on the greater trochanter. Engng in Medicine, 1988, 17, 59–62.
28.
LotzJ. C.GerhartT. N.HayesW. C.Mechanical properties of trabecular bone from the proximal femur: A quantative CT study. J. Comput. Assist. Tomogr., 1990, 14, 107–114.
29.
RhoJ. Y.ZerwekhJ. E.AshmanR. B.Examination of several techniques for predicting trabecular elastic modulus and ultimate strength in the human lumbar spine. Clin. Biomechanics, 1994, 9, 67–71.
30.
CodyD. D.McCubbreyD. A.DivineG. W.GrossG. J.GoldsteinS. A.Predictive value of proximal femoral bone densitometry in determining local orthogonal material properties. J. Biomechanics, 1996, 29, 753–761.
31.
KaralisT.GalanosP.Research on the mechanical impedance of human bone by a drilling test. J. Biomechanics, 1982, 15, 561–581.
32.
ChagneauF.LevasseurM.Mechanical analysis of bone structures by dynamostratigraphy. Eur. J. Mechanics A/Solids, 1992, 11, 551–571.
33.
HvidI.AndersenK.OlesenS.Cancellous bone strength measurement with the osteopenetrometer. Engng in Medicine, 1984, 13, 73–78.
34.
BentzenS. M.HvidI.JorgensenJ.Mechanical strength of tibial trabecular bone evaluated by X-ray computed tomography. J. Biomechanics, 1987, 20, 743–752.
35.
PetersenM. M.JensenN. C.GehrchenP. M.NielsenP. K.NielsenP. T.The relation between trabecular bone strength and bone mineral density by dual-photon and dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry in the proximal tibia. Calcif. Tissue Int., 1996, 59, 311–314.
36.
JaegerJ. C.CookN. G. W.Fundamentals of Rock Mechanics, 1979 (Chapman and Hall, London).
