A Fluid Structure Interaction Model of Trabecular Bone

Links

URL: https://researchportal.bath.ac.uk/en/studentTheses/a-fluid-structure-interaction-model-of-trabecular-bone

Abstract

Knee osteoarthritis (OA) is one of the most prominent forms of the degenerative joint disease. Due to changes in lifestyle, it affects patients of increasingly younger age with higher levels of physical activity, justifying less invasive treatment options than total knee replacement (TKR) surgery. Unicompartmental knee replacement (UKR) surgery has been used for over 40 years to treat late-stage OA locally limited to one compartment of the knee. However, within months of the operation pain occurs in the antero-medial region of the proximal tibia in a substantial number of patients. The change in load distribution after implant insertion is thought to affect the remodelling process of the bone. As the structure within the bone changes, so does the bone marrows response to loading. Previous work has shown that the perceived location coincides with a local von Mises strain maximum in the trabeculae. As nociceptors in the bone are located on the border of the bone marrow, the current study investigated the effect of changes in bone microstructure on the pressure within the bone marrow. A fluid-structure interaction (FSI) microstructure model representative of the trabecular bone structure and bone marrow was generated using the open-source software OpenFOAM. Data generated in experiments conducted on a 3D printed specimen representing the model were used to analyse the pressure distribution throughout the structure and to validate the trabecular bone and bone marrow model. The overall pressure showed good agreement between the experiment and the model, which raised confidence in the modelling technique. The local pressure distribution, however, was not the same. Models of simple structures were generated to isolate and analyse those aspects affecting the fluid response. Alterations to the simple structure provided further insight into the effect of structural changes on the pressure within the bone marrow. The generated FSI model demonstrated the highly non-linear behaviour of the fluid and solid domains and helped to identify aspects influencing the pressure response. While an overall larger fluid domain decreased the pressure, it was not possible to identify a single predominant factor able to predict the change in pressure distribution. The choice of the fluid model had a large effect on the fluid response.

Cited Works (22)

Year	Entry
1991	Snyder SM, Schneider E. Estimation of mechanical properties of cortical bone by computed tomography. J Orthop Res. May 1991;9(3):422-431.
1989	Ashman RB, Rho JY, Turner CH. Anatomical variation of orthotropic elastic moduli of the proximal human tibia. J Biomech. 1989;22(8-9):895-900.
1998	Aerssens J, Boonen S, Lowet G, Dequeker J. Interspecies differences in bone composition, density, and quality: potential implications for in vivo bone research. Endocrinology. February 1998;139(2):663-670.
2001	Keaveny TM, Morgan EF, Niebur GL, Yeh OC. Biomechanics of trabecular bone. Annu Rev Biomed Eng. 2001;3:307-333.
1999	Cowin SC. Bone poroelasticity. J Biomech. March 1999;32(3):217-238.
1998	Ulrich D, van Rietbergen B, Weinans H, Rüegsegger P. Finite element analysis of trabecular bone structure: a comparison of image-based meshing techniques. J Biomech. December 1998;31(12):1187-1192.
2012	Verbruggen SW, Vaughan TJ, McNamara LM. Strain amplification in bone mechanobiology: a computational investigation of the in vivo mechanics of osteocytes. J R Soc Interface. October 7, 2012;9(75):2735-2744.
2009	Fritton SP, Weinbaum S. Fluid and solute transport in bone: flow-induced mechanotransduction. Annu Rev Fluid Mech. 2009;41:347-374.
1996	Pattin CA, Caler WE, Carter DR. Cyclic mechanical property degradation during fatigue loading of cortical bone. J Biomech. January 1996;29(1):69-79.
2007	Schileo E, Taddei F, Malandrino A, Cristofolini L, Viceconti M. Subject-specific finite element models can accurately predict strain levels in long bones. J Biomech. 2007;40(13):2982-2989.
1987	Goldstein SA. The mechanical properties of trabecular bone: dependence on anatomic location and function. J Biomech. 1987;20(11-12):1055-1061.
2015	Wang J, Zhou B, Liu XS, Fields AJ, Sanyal A, Shi X, Adams M, Keaveny TM, Guo XE. Trabecular plates and rods determine elastic modulus and yield strength of human trabecular bone. Bone. March 2015;72:71-80.
2015	Wegst UGK, Bai H, Saiz E, Tomsia AP, Ritchie RO. Bioinspired structural materials. Nat Mater. January 2015;14(1):23-36.
2008	Helgason B, Perilli E, Schileo E, Taddei F, Brynjólfsson S, Viceconti M. Mathematical relationships between bone density and mechanical properties: a literature review. Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon). 2008;23(2):135-146.
1994	Weinbaum S, Cowin SC, Zeng Y. A model for the excitation of osteocytes by mechanical loading-induced bone fluid shear stresses. J Biomech. March 1994;27(3):339-360.
2013	Chen H, Zhou X, Fujita H, Onozuka M, Kubo K-Y. Age-related changes in trabecular and cortical bone microstructure. Int J Endocrinol. March 18, 2013;2013:213234.
2003	Morgan EF, Bayraktar HH, Keaveny TM. Trabecular bone modulus–density relationships depend on anatomic site. J Biomech. July 2003;36(7):897-904.
2004	Doblaré M, García JM, Gomez MJ. Modelling bone tissue fracture and healing: a review. Eng Fract Mech. September 2004;71(13-14):1809-1840.
1998	Zioupos P, Currey JD. Changes in the stiffness, strength, and toughness of human cortical bone with age. Bone. January 1998;22(1):57-66.
1993	Rho JY, Ashman RB, Turner CH. Young's modulus of trabecular and cortical bone material: ultrasonic and microtensile measurements. J Biomech. February 1993;26(2):111-119.
1995	van Rietbergen B, Weinans H, Huiskes R, Odgaard A. A new method to determine trabecular bone elastic properties and loading using micromechanical finite-element models. J Biomech. January 1995;28(1):69-81.
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.