150 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 31144729)
21. Femoral strength is better predicted by finite element models than QCT and DXA.
Cody DD; Gross GJ; Hou FJ; Spencer HJ; Goldstein SA; Fyhrie DP
J Biomech; 1999 Oct; 32(10):1013-20. PubMed ID: 10476839
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
22. Orthotropic HR-pQCT-based FE models improve strength predictions for stance but not for side-way fall loading compared to isotropic QCT-based FE models of human femurs.
Luisier B; Dall'Ara E; Pahr DH
J Mech Behav Biomed Mater; 2014 Apr; 32():287-299. PubMed ID: 24508715
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
23. Identification of a crushable foam material model and application to strength and damage prediction of human femur and vertebral body.
Kinzl M; Wolfram U; Pahr DH
J Mech Behav Biomed Mater; 2013 Oct; 26():136-47. PubMed ID: 23768961
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
24. Comparison of non-invasive assessments of strength of the proximal femur.
Johannesdottir F; Thrall E; Muller J; Keaveny TM; Kopperdahl DL; Bouxsein ML
Bone; 2017 Dec; 105():93-102. PubMed ID: 28739416
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
25. The predictive ability of a QCT-FE model of the proximal femoral stiffness under multiple load cases is strongly influenced by experimental uncertainties.
Amini M; Reisinger A; Synek A; Hirtler L; Pahr D
J Mech Behav Biomed Mater; 2023 Mar; 139():105664. PubMed ID: 36657193
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
26. Femoral fracture type can be predicted from femoral structure: A finite element study validated by digital volume correlation experiments.
Ridzwan MIZ; Sukjamsri C; Pal B; van Arkel RJ; Bell A; Khanna M; Baskaradas A; Abel R; Boughton O; Cobb J; Hansen UN
J Orthop Res; 2018 Mar; 36(3):993-1001. PubMed ID: 28762563
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
27. QCT-based finite element prediction of pathologic fractures in proximal femora with metastatic lesions.
Benca E; Synek A; Amini M; Kainberger F; Hirtler L; Windhager R; Mayr W; Pahr DH
Sci Rep; 2019 Jul; 9(1):10305. PubMed ID: 31311994
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
28. A quasi-brittle continuum damage finite element model of the human proximal femur based on element deletion.
Hambli R
Med Biol Eng Comput; 2013 Feb; 51(1-2):219-31. PubMed ID: 23179412
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
29. Integrated remodeling-to-fracture finite element model of human proximal femur behavior.
Hambli R; Lespessailles E; Benhamou CL
J Mech Behav Biomed Mater; 2013 Jan; 17():89-106. PubMed ID: 23122886
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
30. The effect of boundary and loading conditions on patient classification using finite element predicted risk of fracture.
Altai Z; Qasim M; Li X; Viceconti M
Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon); 2019 Aug; 68():137-143. PubMed ID: 31202100
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
31. A nonlinear QCT-based finite element model validation study for the human femur tested in two configurations in vitro.
Dall'Ara E; Luisier B; Schmidt R; Kainberger F; Zysset P; Pahr D
Bone; 2013 Jan; 52(1):27-38. PubMed ID: 22985891
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
32. Proximal femur bone strength estimated by a computationally fast finite element analysis in a sideways fall configuration.
Nishiyama KK; Gilchrist S; Guy P; Cripton P; Boyd SK
J Biomech; 2013 Apr; 46(7):1231-6. PubMed ID: 23540722
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
33. Finite element prediction of proximal femur fracture pattern based on orthotropic behaviour law coupled to quasi-brittle damage.
Hambli R; Bettamer A; Allaoui S
Med Eng Phys; 2012 Mar; 34(2):202-10. PubMed ID: 21824797
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
34. Prediction of the pathological fracture risk during stance and fall-loading configurations for metastases in the proximal femur, using a computed tomography-based finite element method.
Shinoda Y; Kobayashi H; Kaneko M; Ohashi S; Bessho M; Hayashi N; Oka H; Imanishi J; Sawada R; Ogura K; Tanaka S; Haga N; Kawano H
J Orthop Sci; 2019 Nov; 24(6):1074-1080. PubMed ID: 31521453
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
35. The assessment of the risk of fracture in femora with metastatic lesions: comparing case-specific finite element analyses with predictions by clinical experts.
Derikx LC; van Aken JB; Janssen D; Snyers A; van der Linden YM; Verdonschot N; Tanck E
J Bone Joint Surg Br; 2012 Aug; 94(8):1135-42. PubMed ID: 22844058
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
36. Incorporating in vivo fall assessments in the simulation of femoral fractures with finite element models.
van der Zijden AM; Janssen D; Verdonschot N; Groen BE; Nienhuis B; Weerdesteyn V; Tanck E
Med Eng Phys; 2015 Jun; 37(6):593-8. PubMed ID: 25892569
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
37. Exercise loading history and femoral neck strength in a sideways fall: A three-dimensional finite element modeling study.
Abe S; Narra N; Nikander R; Hyttinen J; Kouhia R; Sievänen H
Bone; 2016 Nov; 92():9-17. PubMed ID: 27477004
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
38. Fracture prediction for the proximal femur using finite element models: Part I--Linear analysis.
Lotz JC; Cheal EJ; Hayes WC
J Biomech Eng; 1991 Nov; 113(4):353-60. PubMed ID: 1762430
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
39. Statistical shape and appearance models for fast and automated estimation of proximal femur fracture load using 2D finite element models.
Sarkalkan N; Waarsing JH; Bos PK; Weinans H; Zadpoor AA
J Biomech; 2014 Sep; 47(12):3107-14. PubMed ID: 25052137
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
40. 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]
[Previous] [Next] [New Search]
