Cargando…

Patient‐specific finite element models of the human mandible: Lack of consensus on current set‐ups

The use of finite element analysis (FEA) has increased rapidly over the last decennia and has become a popular tool to design implants, osteosynthesis plates and prostheses. With increasing computer capacity and the availability of software applications, it has become easier to employ the FEA. Howev...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Merema, Bram Barteld Jan, Kraeima, Joep, Glas, Haye H., Spijkervet, Fred K. L., Witjes, Max J. H.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7818111/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32372548
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/odi.13381
_version_ 1783638767457796096
author Merema, Bram Barteld Jan
Kraeima, Joep
Glas, Haye H.
Spijkervet, Fred K. L.
Witjes, Max J. H.
author_facet Merema, Bram Barteld Jan
Kraeima, Joep
Glas, Haye H.
Spijkervet, Fred K. L.
Witjes, Max J. H.
author_sort Merema, Bram Barteld Jan
collection PubMed
description The use of finite element analysis (FEA) has increased rapidly over the last decennia and has become a popular tool to design implants, osteosynthesis plates and prostheses. With increasing computer capacity and the availability of software applications, it has become easier to employ the FEA. However, there seems to be no consensus on the input variables that should be applied to representative FEA models of the human mandible. This review aims to find a consensus on how to define the representative input factors for a FEA model of the human mandible. A literature search carried out in the PubMed and Embase database resulted in 137 matches. Seven papers were included in this current study. Within the search results, only a few FEA models had been validated. The material properties and FEA approaches varied considerably, and the available validations are not strong enough for a general consensus. Further validations are required, preferably using the same measuring workflow to obtain insight into the broad array of mandibular variations. A lot of work is still required to establish validated FEA settings and to prevent assumptions when it comes to FEA applications.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7818111
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher John Wiley and Sons Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-78181112021-01-29 Patient‐specific finite element models of the human mandible: Lack of consensus on current set‐ups Merema, Bram Barteld Jan Kraeima, Joep Glas, Haye H. Spijkervet, Fred K. L. Witjes, Max J. H. Oral Dis Bone and Hard Tissues The use of finite element analysis (FEA) has increased rapidly over the last decennia and has become a popular tool to design implants, osteosynthesis plates and prostheses. With increasing computer capacity and the availability of software applications, it has become easier to employ the FEA. However, there seems to be no consensus on the input variables that should be applied to representative FEA models of the human mandible. This review aims to find a consensus on how to define the representative input factors for a FEA model of the human mandible. A literature search carried out in the PubMed and Embase database resulted in 137 matches. Seven papers were included in this current study. Within the search results, only a few FEA models had been validated. The material properties and FEA approaches varied considerably, and the available validations are not strong enough for a general consensus. Further validations are required, preferably using the same measuring workflow to obtain insight into the broad array of mandibular variations. A lot of work is still required to establish validated FEA settings and to prevent assumptions when it comes to FEA applications. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2020-07-09 2021-01 /pmc/articles/PMC7818111/ /pubmed/32372548 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/odi.13381 Text en © 2020 The Authors. Oral Diseases published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd. This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Bone and Hard Tissues
Merema, Bram Barteld Jan
Kraeima, Joep
Glas, Haye H.
Spijkervet, Fred K. L.
Witjes, Max J. H.
Patient‐specific finite element models of the human mandible: Lack of consensus on current set‐ups
title Patient‐specific finite element models of the human mandible: Lack of consensus on current set‐ups
title_full Patient‐specific finite element models of the human mandible: Lack of consensus on current set‐ups
title_fullStr Patient‐specific finite element models of the human mandible: Lack of consensus on current set‐ups
title_full_unstemmed Patient‐specific finite element models of the human mandible: Lack of consensus on current set‐ups
title_short Patient‐specific finite element models of the human mandible: Lack of consensus on current set‐ups
title_sort patient‐specific finite element models of the human mandible: lack of consensus on current set‐ups
topic Bone and Hard Tissues
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7818111/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32372548
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/odi.13381
work_keys_str_mv AT meremabrambarteldjan patientspecificfiniteelementmodelsofthehumanmandiblelackofconsensusoncurrentsetups
AT kraeimajoep patientspecificfiniteelementmodelsofthehumanmandiblelackofconsensusoncurrentsetups
AT glashayeh patientspecificfiniteelementmodelsofthehumanmandiblelackofconsensusoncurrentsetups
AT spijkervetfredkl patientspecificfiniteelementmodelsofthehumanmandiblelackofconsensusoncurrentsetups
AT witjesmaxjh patientspecificfiniteelementmodelsofthehumanmandiblelackofconsensusoncurrentsetups