268 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 21030287)
1. In situ parameter identification of optimal density-elastic modulus relationships in subject-specific finite element models of the proximal femur.
Cong A; Buijs JO; Dragomir-Daescu D
Med Eng Phys; 2011 Mar; 33(2):164-73. PubMed ID: 21030287
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Finite element models predict cancellous apparent modulus when tissue modulus is scaled from specimen CT-attenuation.
Bourne BC; van der Meulen MC
J Biomech; 2004 May; 37(5):613-21. PubMed ID: 15046990
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Prediction of local proximal tibial subchondral bone structural stiffness using subject-specific finite element modeling: Effect of selected density-modulus relationship.
Nazemi SM; Amini M; Kontulainen SA; Milner JS; Holdsworth DW; Masri BA; Wilson DR; Johnston JD
Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon); 2015 Aug; 30(7):703-12. PubMed ID: 26024555
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Are DXA/aBMD and QCT/FEA Stiffness and Strength Estimates Sensitive to Sex and Age?
Rezaei A; Giambini H; Rossman T; Carlson KD; Yaszemski MJ; Lu L; Dragomir-Daescu D
Ann Biomed Eng; 2017 Dec; 45(12):2847-2856. PubMed ID: 28940110
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Validated finite element models of the proximal femur using two-dimensional projected geometry and bone density.
Op Den Buijs J; Dragomir-Daescu D
Comput Methods Programs Biomed; 2011 Nov; 104(2):168-74. PubMed ID: 21159405
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Reliable simulations of the human proximal femur by high-order finite element analysis validated by experimental observations.
Yosibash Z; Trabelsi N; Milgrom C
J Biomech; 2007; 40(16):3688-99. PubMed ID: 17706228
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Comparison of 3D finite element analysis derived stiffness and BMD to determine the failure load of the excised proximal femur.
Langton CM; Pisharody S; Keyak JH
Med Eng Phys; 2009 Jul; 31(6):668-72. PubMed ID: 19230742
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Generation of 3D shape, density, cortical thickness and finite element mesh of proximal femur from a DXA image.
Väänänen SP; Grassi L; Flivik G; Jurvelin JS; Isaksson H
Med Image Anal; 2015 Aug; 24(1):125-134. PubMed ID: 26148575
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Optimizing finite element predictions of local subchondral bone structural stiffness using neural network-derived density-modulus relationships for proximal tibial subchondral cortical and trabecular bone.
Nazemi SM; Amini M; Kontulainen SA; Milner JS; Holdsworth DW; Masri BA; Wilson DR; Johnston JD
Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon); 2017 Jan; 41():1-8. PubMed ID: 27842233
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Cortical bone mapping improves finite element strain prediction accuracy at the proximal femur.
Schileo E; Pitocchi J; Falcinelli C; Taddei F
Bone; 2020 Jul; 136():115348. PubMed ID: 32240847
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Comparison between DEXA and finite element studies in the long-term bone remodeling of an anatomical femoral stem.
Herrera A; Panisello JJ; Ibarz E; Cegoñino J; Puértolas JA; Gracia L
J Biomech Eng; 2009 Apr; 131(4):041013. PubMed ID: 19275442
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Morphology based anisotropic finite element models of the proximal femur validated with experimental data.
Enns-Bray WS; Ariza O; Gilchrist S; Widmer Soyka RP; Vogt PJ; Palsson H; Boyd SK; Guy P; Cripton PA; Ferguson SJ; Helgason B
Med Eng Phys; 2016 Nov; 38(11):1339-1347. PubMed ID: 27641660
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Sensitivity of periprosthetic stress-shielding to load and the bone density-modulus relationship in subject-specific finite element models.
Weinans H; Sumner DR; Igloria R; Natarajan RN
J Biomech; 2000 Jul; 33(7):809-17. PubMed ID: 10831755
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Left-right differences in the proximal femur's strength of post-menopausal women: a multicentric finite element study.
Taddei F; Falcinelli C; Balistreri L; Henys P; Baruffaldi F; Sigurdsson S; Gudnason V; Harris TB; Dietzel R; Armbrecht G; Boutroy S; Schileo E
Osteoporos Int; 2016 Apr; 27(4):1519-1528. PubMed ID: 26576543
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Constructing anisotropic finite element model of bone from computed tomography (CT).
Kazembakhshi S; Luo Y
Biomed Mater Eng; 2014; 24(6):2619-26. PubMed ID: 25226965
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. A CT-based high-order finite element analysis of the human proximal femur compared to in-vitro experiments.
Yosibash Z; Padan R; Joskowicz L; Milgrom C
J Biomech Eng; 2007 Jun; 129(3):297-309. PubMed ID: 17536896
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Concept and development of an orthotropic FE model of the proximal femur.
Wirtz DC; Pandorf T; Portheine F; Radermacher K; Schiffers N; Prescher A; Weichert D; Niethard FU
J Biomech; 2003 Feb; 36(2):289-93. PubMed ID: 12547369
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Predictive value of proximal femoral bone densitometry in determining local orthogonal material properties.
Cody DD; McCubbrey DA; Divine GW; Gross GJ; Goldstein SA
J Biomech; 1996 Jun; 29(6):753-61. PubMed ID: 9147972
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Prediction of fracture load and stiffness of the proximal femur by CT-based specimen specific finite element analysis: cadaveric validation study.
Miura M; Nakamura J; Matsuura Y; Wako Y; Suzuki T; Hagiwara S; Orita S; Inage K; Kawarai Y; Sugano M; Nawata K; Ohtori S
BMC Musculoskelet Disord; 2017 Dec; 18(1):536. PubMed ID: 29246133
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Prediction of Young׳s modulus of trabeculae in microscale using macro-scale׳s relationships between bone density and mechanical properties.
Cyganik Ł; Binkowski M; Kokot G; Rusin T; Popik P; Bolechała F; Nowak R; Wróbel Z; John A
J Mech Behav Biomed Mater; 2014 Aug; 36():120-34. PubMed ID: 24837330
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
