Cargando…

Which experimental procedures influence the apparent proximal femoral stiffness? A parametric study

BACKGROUND: Experimental validation is the gold standard for the development of FE predictive models of bone. Employing multiple loading directions could improve this process. To capture the correct directional response of a sample, the effect of all influential parameters should be systematically c...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Amini, Morteza, Reisinger, Andreas, Hirtler, Lena, Pahr, Dieter
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8461859/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34556078
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12891-021-04656-0
_version_ 1784572074968219648
author Amini, Morteza
Reisinger, Andreas
Hirtler, Lena
Pahr, Dieter
author_facet Amini, Morteza
Reisinger, Andreas
Hirtler, Lena
Pahr, Dieter
author_sort Amini, Morteza
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Experimental validation is the gold standard for the development of FE predictive models of bone. Employing multiple loading directions could improve this process. To capture the correct directional response of a sample, the effect of all influential parameters should be systematically considered. This study aims to determine the impact of common experimental parameters on the proximal femur’s apparent stiffness. METHODS: To that end, a parametric approach was taken to study the effects of: repetition, pre-loading, re-adjustment, re-fixation, storage, and μCT scanning as random sources of uncertainties, and loading direction as the controlled source of variation in both stand and side-fall configurations. Ten fresh-frozen proximal femoral specimens were prepared and tested with a novel setup in three consecutive sets of experiments. The neutral state and 15-degree abduction and adduction angles in both stance and fall configurations were tested for all samples and parameters. The apparent stiffness of the samples was measured using load-displacement data from the testing machine and validated against marker displacement data tracked by DIC cameras. RESULTS: Among the sources of uncertainties, only the storage cycle affected the proximal femoral apparent stiffness significantly. The random effects of setup manipulation and intermittent μCT scanning were negligible. The 15(∘) deviation in loading direction had a significant effect comparable in size to that of switching the loading configuration from neutral stance to neutral side-fall. CONCLUSION: According to these results, comparisons between the stiffness of the samples under various loading scenarios can be made if there are no storage intervals between the different load cases on the same samples. These outcomes could be used as guidance in defining a highly repeatable and multi-directional experimental validation study protocol.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8461859
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-84618592021-09-24 Which experimental procedures influence the apparent proximal femoral stiffness? A parametric study Amini, Morteza Reisinger, Andreas Hirtler, Lena Pahr, Dieter BMC Musculoskelet Disord Research BACKGROUND: Experimental validation is the gold standard for the development of FE predictive models of bone. Employing multiple loading directions could improve this process. To capture the correct directional response of a sample, the effect of all influential parameters should be systematically considered. This study aims to determine the impact of common experimental parameters on the proximal femur’s apparent stiffness. METHODS: To that end, a parametric approach was taken to study the effects of: repetition, pre-loading, re-adjustment, re-fixation, storage, and μCT scanning as random sources of uncertainties, and loading direction as the controlled source of variation in both stand and side-fall configurations. Ten fresh-frozen proximal femoral specimens were prepared and tested with a novel setup in three consecutive sets of experiments. The neutral state and 15-degree abduction and adduction angles in both stance and fall configurations were tested for all samples and parameters. The apparent stiffness of the samples was measured using load-displacement data from the testing machine and validated against marker displacement data tracked by DIC cameras. RESULTS: Among the sources of uncertainties, only the storage cycle affected the proximal femoral apparent stiffness significantly. The random effects of setup manipulation and intermittent μCT scanning were negligible. The 15(∘) deviation in loading direction had a significant effect comparable in size to that of switching the loading configuration from neutral stance to neutral side-fall. CONCLUSION: According to these results, comparisons between the stiffness of the samples under various loading scenarios can be made if there are no storage intervals between the different load cases on the same samples. These outcomes could be used as guidance in defining a highly repeatable and multi-directional experimental validation study protocol. BioMed Central 2021-09-23 /pmc/articles/PMC8461859/ /pubmed/34556078 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12891-021-04656-0 Text en © The Author(s) 2021 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visithttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.
spellingShingle Research
Amini, Morteza
Reisinger, Andreas
Hirtler, Lena
Pahr, Dieter
Which experimental procedures influence the apparent proximal femoral stiffness? A parametric study
title Which experimental procedures influence the apparent proximal femoral stiffness? A parametric study
title_full Which experimental procedures influence the apparent proximal femoral stiffness? A parametric study
title_fullStr Which experimental procedures influence the apparent proximal femoral stiffness? A parametric study
title_full_unstemmed Which experimental procedures influence the apparent proximal femoral stiffness? A parametric study
title_short Which experimental procedures influence the apparent proximal femoral stiffness? A parametric study
title_sort which experimental procedures influence the apparent proximal femoral stiffness? a parametric study
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8461859/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34556078
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12891-021-04656-0
work_keys_str_mv AT aminimorteza whichexperimentalproceduresinfluencetheapparentproximalfemoralstiffnessaparametricstudy
AT reisingerandreas whichexperimentalproceduresinfluencetheapparentproximalfemoralstiffnessaparametricstudy
AT hirtlerlena whichexperimentalproceduresinfluencetheapparentproximalfemoralstiffnessaparametricstudy
AT pahrdieter whichexperimentalproceduresinfluencetheapparentproximalfemoralstiffnessaparametricstudy