Download PDF
J Knee Surg 2016; 29(02): 149-158
DOI: 10.1055/s-0035-1570114
Special Focus Section
Thieme Medical Publishers 333 Seventh Avenue, New York, NY 10001, USA.

The Use of Finite Element Analysis to Enhance Research and Clinical Practice in Orthopedics

Ferris M. Pfeiffer
1   Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, University of Missouri, Columbia, Missouri
2   Department of Bioengineering, University of Missouri, Columbia, Missouri
› Author Affiliations
Further Information

Publication History

30 April 2015

01 November 2015

Publication Date:
08 January 2016 (online)

    Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

Finite element analysis (FEA) is a very powerful tool for the evaluation of biomechanics in orthopedics. Finite element (FE) simulations can effectively and efficiently evaluate thousands of variables (such as implant variation, surgical techniques, and various pathologies) to optimize design, screening, prediction, and treatment in orthopedics. Additionally, FEA can be used to retrospectively evaluate and troubleshoot complications or failures to prevent similar future occurrences. Finally, FE simulations are used to evaluate implants, procedures, and techniques in a time- and cost-effective manner. In this work, an overview of the development of FE models is provided and an example application is presented to simulate knee biomechanics for a specimen with medial meniscus insufficiency. FE models require the development of the geometry of interest, determination of the material properties of the tissues simulated, and an accurate application of a numerical solver to produce an accurate solution and representation of the field variables. The objectives of this work are to introduce the reader to the application of FEA in orthopedic analysis of the knee joint. A brief description of the model development process as well as a specific application to the investigation of knee joint stability in geometries with normal or compromised medial meniscal attachment is included. Significant increases in stretch of the anterior cruciate ligament were predicted in specimens with medial meniscus insufficiency (such behavior was confirmed in corresponding biomechanical testing). It can be concluded from this work that FE analysis of the knee can provide significant new information with which more effective clinical decisions can be made.

Keywords

finite element analysis - computational analysis - simulation - patient specific
 

  • References

  • 1 Cook RD, Malkus DS, Plesha ME, Witt RJ. Concepts and Applications of Finite Element Analysis. 4th ed. New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc; 2002
    Google Scholar
  • 2 Fagan MJ, Julian S, Mohsen AM. Finite element analysis in spine research. Proc Inst Mech Eng H 2002; 216 (5) 281-298
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Goel VK, Gilbertson LG. Applications of the finite element method to thoracolumbar spinal research—past, present, and future. Spine 1995; 20 (15) 1719-1727
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Goel VK, Kong W, Han JS, Weinstein JN, Gilbertson LG. A combined finite element and optimization investigation of lumbar spine mechanics with and without muscles. Spine 1993; 18 (11) 1531-1541
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Huebner KH, Dewhirst DL, Smith DE, Byrom TG. The Finite Element Method for Engineers. 4th ed. New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc; 2001
    Google Scholar
  • 6 Kong WZ, Goel VK. Ability of the finite element models to predict response of the human spine to sinusoidal vertical vibration. Spine 2003; 28 (17) 1961-1967
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Liebschner MAK, Kopperdahl DL, Rosenberg WS, Keaveny TM. Finite element modeling of the human thoracolumbar spine. Spine 2003; 28 (6) 559-565
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Mattei L, Campioni E, Accardi MA, Dini D. Finite element analysis of the meniscectomised tibio-femoral joint: implementation of advanced articular cartilage models. Comput Methods Biomech Biomed Engin 2014; 17 (14) 1553-1571
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Noor AK. Bibliography of books and monographs on finite element technology. Appl Mech Rev 1991; 44 (6) 307-317
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Pfeiffer FM, Smith DE, Ward CV, Alander DA. Patient Specific Finite Element Modeling of Lumbar Vertebrae. Palo Alto, CA: American Society of Biomechanics; 2007
    Google Scholar
  • 11 Reddy JN. An Introduction to the Finite Element Method. 2nd ed. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Co.; 1993
    Google Scholar
  • 12 Williamson Jr F. An historical note on the finite element method. Int J Numer Methods Eng 1980; 15 (6) 930-934
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Belytschko T, Kulak RF, Schultz AB, Galante JO. Finite element stress analysis of an intervertebral disc. J Biomech 1974; 7 (3) 277-285
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Crawford RP, Rosenberg WS, Keaveny TM. Quantitative computed tomography-based finite element models of the human lumbar vertebral body: effect of element size on stiffness, damage, and fracture strength predictions. J Biomech Eng 2003; 125 (4) 434-438
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Faulkner KG, Cann CE, Hasegawa BH. Effect of bone distribution on vertebral strength: assessment with patient-specific nonlinear finite element analysis. Radiology 1991; 179 (3) 669-674
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Hirata Y, Inaba Y, Kobayashi N , et al. Correlation between mechanical stress by finite element analysis and 18F-fluoride PET uptake in hip osteoarthritis patients. J Orthop Res 2015; 33 (1) 78-83
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Hopkins AR, New AM, Rodriguez-y-Baena F, Taylor M. Finite element analysis of unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. Med Eng Phys 2010; 32 (1) 14-21
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Imai K, Ohnishi I, Bessho M, Nakamura K. Nonlinear finite element model predicts vertebral bone strength and fracture site. Spine 2006; 31 (16) 1789-1794
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Jacobs CR, Levenston ME, Beaupré GS, Simo JC, Carter DR. Numerical instabilities in bone remodeling simulations: the advantages of a node-based finite element approach. J Biomech 1995; 28 (4) 449-459
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Jog CS, Haber RB. Stability of finite element models for distributed-parameter optimization and topology design. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng 1996; 130 (3–4) 203-226
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Kong WZ, Goel VK, Gilbertson LG, Weinstein JN. Effects of muscle dysfunction on lumbar spine mechanics. A finite element study based on a two motion segments model. Spine 1996; 21 (19) 2197-2206 , discussion 2206–2207
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Kumaresan S, Yoganandan N, Pintar FA, Maiman DJ, Kuppa S. Biomechanical study of pediatric human cervical spine: a finite element approach. J Biomech Eng 2000; 122 (1) 60-71
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 23 Lee CK, Kim YE, Lee CS, Hong YM, Jung JM, Goel VK. Impact response of the intervertebral disc in a finite-element model. Spine 2000; 25 (19) 2431-2439
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 24 Miller JAA, Haderspeck KA, Schultz AB. Posterior element loads in lumbar motion segments. Spine 1983; 8 (3) 331-337
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 25 Natarajan RN, Garretson III RB, Biyani A, Lim TH, Andersson GBJ, An HS. Effects of slip severity and loading directions on the stability of isthmic spondylolisthesis: a finite element model study. Spine 2003; 28 (11) 1103-1112
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 26 Rohlmann A, Zander T, Schmidt H, Wilke HJ, Bergmann G. Analysis of the influence of disc degeneration on the mechanical behaviour of a lumbar motion segment using the finite element method. J Biomech 2006; 39 (13) 2484-2490
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 27 Schmidt H, Kettler A, Rohlmann A, Claes L, Wilke HJ. The risk of disc prolapses with complex loading in different degrees of disc degeneration - a finite element analysis. Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon) 2007; 22 (9) 988-998
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 28 Shuib S, Ridzwan M, Mohamad Ibrahim M, Tan C. Analysis of orthopedic screws for bone fracture fixations with finite element method. J Appl Sci 2007; 7 (13) 1748-1754
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 29 Silva MJ, Keaveny TM, Hayes WC. Computed tomography-based finite element analysis predicts failure loads and fracture patterns for vertebral sections. J Orthop Res 1998; 16 (3) 300-308
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 30 Totoribe K, Tajima N, Chosa E. A biomechanical study of posterolateral lumbar fusion using a three-dimensional nonlinear finite element method. J Orthop Sci 1999; 4 (2) 115-126
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 31 Tsouknidas A, Sarigiannidis SO, Anagnostidis K, Michailidis N, Ahuja S. Assessment of stress patterns on a spinal motion segment in healthy versus osteoporotic bony models with or without disc degeneration: a finite element analysis. Spine J 2015; 15 (3, Suppl): S17-S22
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 32 Beaubien BP, Derincek A, Lew WD, Wood KB. In vitro, biomechanical comparison of an anterior lumbar interbody fusion with an anteriorly placed, low-profile lumbar plate and posteriorly placed pedicle screws or translaminar screws. Spine 2005; 30 (16) 1846-1851
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 33 Beaupré GS, Orr TE, Carter DR. An approach for time-dependent bone modeling and remodeling—theoretical development. J Orthop Res 1990; 8 (5) 651-661
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 34 Beaupré GS, Orr TE, Carter DR. An approach for time-dependent bone modeling and remodeling-application: a preliminary remodeling simulation. J Orthop Res 1990; 8 (5) 662-670
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 35 Blenman PR, Carter DR, Beaupré GS. Role of mechanical loading in the progressive ossification of a fracture callus. J Orthop Res 1989; 7 (3) 398-407
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 36 Carter DR. Mechanical loading histories and cortical bone remodeling. Calcif Tissue Int 1984; 36 (Suppl. 01) S19-S24
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 37 Carter DR, Beaupré GS. Skeletal Function and Form. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2001
    Google Scholar
  • 38 Carter DR, Beaupré GS, Giori NJ, Helms JA. Mechanobiology of skeletal regeneration. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1998; (355, Suppl): S41-S55
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 39 Carter DR, Blenman PR, Beaupré GS. Correlations between mechanical stress history and tissue differentiation in initial fracture healing. J Orthop Res 1988; 6 (5) 736-748
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 40 Cowin SC, Hegedus DH. Bone remodeling I: theory of adaptive elasticity. J Elast 1976; 6 (3) 313-326
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 41 Frost HM. The Laws of Bone Structure. Springfield, IL: Charles C. Thomas; 1964
    Google Scholar
  • 42 Frost HM. Bone “mass” and the “mechanostat”: a proposal. Anat Rec 1987; 219 (1) 1-9
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 43 Goldring SR. Role of bone in osteoarthritis pathogenesis. Med Clin North Am 2009; 93 (1) 25-35 , xv
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 44 Halvorson TL, Kelley LA, Thomas KA, Whitecloud III TS, Cook SD. Effects of bone mineral density on pedicle screw fixation. Spine 1994; 19 (21) 2415-2420
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 45 Kummer BK. Biomechanics of Bone. Englewood Cliffs, CA: Prentice Hall; 1972
    Google Scholar
  • 46 Erdemir A. Open knee: a pathway to community driven modeling and simulation in joint biomechanics. J Med Device 2013; 7 (4) 0409101-409101
    PubMedGoogle Scholar