168 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 29475110)
1. Pathological fracture risk assessment in patients with femoral metastases using CT-based finite element methods. A retrospective clinical study.
Sternheim A; Giladi O; Gortzak Y; Drexler M; Salai M; Trabelsi N; Milgrom C; Yosibash Z
Bone; 2018 May; 110():215-220. PubMed ID: 29475110
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Mechanical Gains Associated With Virtual Prophylactic Intramedullary Nail Fixation in Femurs With Metastatic Disease.
Johnson JE; Figueroa AV; Brouillette MJ; Miller BJ; Goetz JE
Iowa Orthop J; 2023 Dec; 43(2):70-78. PubMed ID: 38213856
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. The effect of deep learning-based lesion segmentation on failure load calculations of metastatic femurs using finite element analysis.
Ataei A; Eggermont F; Verdonschot N; Lessmann N; Tanck E
Bone; 2024 Feb; 179():116987. PubMed ID: 38061504
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Predicting the stiffness and strength of human femurs with real metastatic tumors.
Yosibash Z; Plitman Mayo R; Dahan G; Trabelsi N; Amir G; Milgrom C
Bone; 2014 Dec; 69():180-90. PubMed ID: 25284156
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. CT-based Structural Rigidity Analysis Is More Accurate Than Mirels Scoring for Fracture Prediction in Metastatic Femoral Lesions.
Damron TA; Nazarian A; Entezari V; Brown C; Grant W; Calderon N; Zurakowski D; Terek RM; Anderson ME; Cheng EY; Aboulafia AJ; Gebhardt MC; Snyder BD
Clin Orthop Relat Res; 2016 Mar; 474(3):643-51. PubMed ID: 26169800
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. The risk assessment of pathological fracture in the proximal femur using a CT-based finite element method.
Kawabata Y; Matsuo K; Nezu Y; Kamiishi T; Inaba Y; Saito T
J Orthop Sci; 2017 Sep; 22(5):931-937. PubMed ID: 28688810
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Prediction of strength and strain of the proximal femur by a CT-based finite element method.
Bessho M; Ohnishi I; Matsuyama J; Matsumoto T; Imai K; Nakamura K
J Biomech; 2007; 40(8):1745-53. PubMed ID: 17034798
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Simulating activities of daily living with finite element analysis improves fracture prediction for patients with metastatic femoral lesions.
Goodheart JR; Cleary RJ; Damron TA; Mann KA
J Orthop Res; 2015 Aug; 33(8):1226-34. PubMed ID: 25761000
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Evaluation of finite element analysis for prediction of the strength reduction due to metastatic lesions in the femoral neck.
Cheal EJ; Hipp JA; Hayes WC
J Biomech; 1993 Mar; 26(3):251-64. PubMed ID: 8468338
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. 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.
Schileo E; Taddei F; Cristofolini L; Viceconti M
J Biomech; 2008; 41(2):356-67. PubMed ID: 18022179
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Finite element analysis and CT-based structural rigidity analysis to assess failure load in bones with simulated lytic defects.
Anez-Bustillos L; Derikx LC; Verdonschot N; Calderon N; Zurakowski D; Snyder BD; Nazarian A; Tanck E
Bone; 2014 Jan; 58():160-7. PubMed ID: 24145305
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Study of stress variations in single-stance and sideways fall using image-based finite element analysis.
Faisal TR; Luo Y
Biomed Mater Eng; 2016 May; 27(1):1-14. PubMed ID: 27175463
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Location of atypical femoral fracture can be determined by tensile stress distribution influenced by femoral bowing and neck-shaft angle: a CT-based nonlinear finite element analysis model for the assessment of femoral shaft loading stress.
Oh Y; Fujita K; Wakabayashi Y; Kurosa Y; Okawa A
Injury; 2017 Dec; 48(12):2736-2743. PubMed ID: 28982480
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Experimental validation of finite element model for proximal composite femur using optical measurements.
Grassi L; Väänänen SP; Amin Yavari S; Weinans H; Jurvelin JS; Zadpoor AA; Isaksson H
J Mech Behav Biomed Mater; 2013 May; 21():86-94. PubMed ID: 23510970
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. The influence of femoral lytic tumors segmentation on autonomous finite element analysis.
Rachmil O; Myers K; Merose O; Sternheim A; Yosibash Z
Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon); 2024 Feb; 112():106192. PubMed ID: 38330735
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Ct-based finite element models can be used to estimate experimentally measured failure loads in the proximal femur.
Koivumäki JE; Thevenot J; Pulkkinen P; Kuhn V; Link TM; Eckstein F; Jämsä T
Bone; 2012 Apr; 50(4):824-9. PubMed ID: 22306697
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Predicting the strength of femoral shafts with and without metastatic lesions.
Keyak JH; Kaneko TS; Rossi SA; Pejcic MR; Tehranzadeh J; Skinner HB
Clin Orthop Relat Res; 2005 Oct; 439():161-70. PubMed ID: 16205155
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Biomechanical model of a high risk impending pathologic fracture of the femur: lesion creation based on clinically implemented scoring systems.
Alexander GE; Gutierrez S; Nayak A; Palumbo BT; Cheong D; Letson GD; Santoni BG
Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon); 2013 Apr; 28(4):408-14. PubMed ID: 23597777
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. The effect of head trauma on fracture healing: biomechanical testing and finite element analysis.
Ozan F; Yıldız H; Bora OA; Pekedis M; Ay Coşkun G; Göre O
Acta Orthop Traumatol Turc; 2010; 44(4):313-21. PubMed ID: 21252609
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. FDG PET/CT Assesses the Risk of Femoral Pathological Fractures in Patients With Metastatic Breast Cancer.
Ulaner GA; Zindman AM; Zheng J; Kim TW; Healey JH
Clin Nucl Med; 2017 Apr; 42(4):264-270. PubMed ID: 28166159
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
