Micro-CT scanning of murine femurs before and after uniaxial compression produce 3- dimensional images detailing changes within the bone micro-architecture. Digital volume correlation (DVC) is a mathematical technique used to determine strain within the bone volume, by tracing the dislocation of a pattern between the 3-dimensional images. Uncertainty in the microstrain calculated arises due to limitations in microscopy, the absence of a homogeneously distributed pattern within the bone volume, and inconsistency the methodology used to process the micro-CT scans and microstrain data.
The uncertainty in strain was quantified as strain error (SE), measured by analyzing repeated micro-CT scans of an uncompressed bone. The Minimum SE quantified was ±180- 225µϵ in accuracy (mean), with a 1100-2100µϵ precision (standard deviation)in rats; ±10- 150µϵ in accuracy, with a 1100-1700µϵ precision in mice. SE displays a regular random distribution throughout the bone volume, centered about 0µϵ and showing strain in both tension and compression.
The minimum SE is obtained by optimizing the DVC input parameters using a design of experiments (D0E). A sub-volume size of 43-55 voxels with a 50-75% volume overlap between consecutive steps of the DVC yielded the lowest SE at the highest strain resolution within the bone sub-volume. A strain error resolution (SER) of ±2500µϵ encapsulates over 90% of the SE, and is chosen as the minimum strain value that is viable when evaluating microstrain from a compression test of the bone. Any strain within the SER limits are eliminated from a viable set of microstrain value, believed to either be error or minimally contributing to the macroscopic properties of the bone.
SER of ±2500µϵ results in a displacement uncertainty of 9-11mum within the bone subvolume. A visual inspection of the repeated scans shows an uncertainty of 2.5 voxels between the 2 images when imaged at a nominal resolution of 4-5µm. The use of monochromatic x-rays (such synchrotron x rays) can increase resolution and reduce the signal-to-noise ratio in the CT scanning process, thus reducing the SE calculated by DVC.
|1999||Bell KL, Loveridge N, Power J, Garrahan N, Meggitt BF, Reeve J. Regional differences in cortical porosity in the fractured femoral neck. Bone. January 1999;24(1):57-64.|
|2010||Bouxsein ML, Boyd SK, Christiansen BA, Guldberg RE, Jepsen KJ, Müller R. Guidelines for assessment of bone microstructure in rodents using micro-computed tomography. J Bone Miner Res. July 2010;25(7):1468-1486.|
|1997||Silva MJ, Gibson LJ. Modeling the mechanical behavior of vertebral trabecular bone: effects of age-related changes in microstructure. Bone. 1997;21(2):191-199.|
|2006||Augat P, Schorlemmer S. The role of cortical bone and its microstructure in bone strength. Age Ageing. September 2006;35(suppl 2):ii27-ii31.|
|2016||Currier EJ. Predicting Peak Load of the Femoral Neck Using Structural Parameters [Master's thesis]. Urbana, IL: University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign; 2016.|
|2017||Bakalova LP. Relating Cortical Bone Mechanics to Intracortical Pore Morphology, Distribution and Remodeling History Within the Fibula Diaphysis [Master's thesis]. Urbana, IL: University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign; 2017.|
|1989||Kuhn JL, Goldstein SA, Ciarelli MJ, Matthews LS. The limitations of canine trabecular bone as a model for human: a biomechanical study. J Biomech. 1989;22(2):95-107.|
|2004||Riggs BL, Melton LJ III, Robb RA, Camp JJ, Atkinson EJ, Peterson JM, Rouleau PA, McCollough CH, Bouxsein ML, Khosla S. Population-based study of age and sex differences in bone volumetricdensity, size, geometry, and structure at different skeletal sites. J Bone Miner Res. December 2004;19(12):1945-1954.|
|1974||Bargren JH, Bassett CAL, Gjelsvik A. Mechanical properties of hydrated cortical bone. J Biomech. May 1974;7(3):239-245.|
|2006||Seeman E, Delmas PD. Bone quality: the material and structural basis of bone strength and fragility. NEJM. May 25, 2006;354(21):2250-2261.|
|2010||Cory E, Nazarian A, Entezari V, Vartanians V, Müller R, Snyder BD. Compressive axial mechanical properties of rat bone as functions of bone volume fraction, apparent density and micro-CT based mineral density. J Biomech. 2010;43(5):953-960.|
|1970||Galante J, Rostoker W, Ray RD. Physical properties of trabecular bone. Calcif Tiss Res. 1970;5(1):236-246.|
|2007||Liu L, Morgan EF. Accuracy and precision of digital volume correlation in quantifying displacements and strains in trabecular bone. J Biomech. 2007;40(15):3516-3520.|
|1999||Bay BK, Smith TS, Fyhrie DP, Saad M. Digital volume correlation: three-dimensional strain mapping using X-ray tomography. Exp Mech. September 1999;39(3):217-226.|
|1998||Rho J-Y, Kuhn-Spearing L, Zioupos P. Mechanical properties and the hierarchical structure of bone. Med Eng Phys. 1998;20(2):92-102.|