Abstract
Abstract
Objectives
Bone shape and internal architecture are accepted as optimised to resist joint contact and muscle forces the skeleton is subjected to through daily living and more demanding activities. Finite element studies to predict bone architecture, either using continuum or structural approaches have made assumptions common in structural optimisation, that lead to trabecular bone effectively being modelled as a truss-type structure, with compressive or tensile strains, present due to axial forces driving adaptation. These models are successful in predicting bone fracture, and trends in bone degradation associated with disuse or unloading osteopenia but tend to overpredict bone mineral density reduction compared to clinical observations.
Methods
A new structural model of bone adaptation, including both trabeculae (element) cross-section adaptation in response to axial force and biaxial bending moments, and alteration of joint (node) positions within the trabecular network, was developed using a Voronoi space partition to define the initial network. This was compared to results from a structural bone adaptation using a truss-type network generated by connecting each node to its nearest 16 neighbours [1].
Results
Relative density (bone volume divided by total volume) was higher in the predicted structure from the Voronoi network, compared to the truss-type network, with elements close to nodes adapting to resist higher bending moments. Bone promoting strains were found to be spread throughout the Voronoi network in contrast to the truss-type network. Predicted bone degradation in the Voronoi network was lower than in the truss-type network when load cases were removed from the loading envelope.
Conclusion
It is hypothesised that bone is optimised for robustness as well as stiffness, with trabecular architecture allowing a wide range of load cases to cause bone promoting strains across the network, reducing the impact of reduced activity or altered loading.
Declaration of Interest
(b) declare that there is no conflict of interest that could be perceived as prejudicing the impartiality of the research reported:I declare that there is no conflict of interest that could be perceived as prejudicing the impartiality of the research project.
