Klets Olesya, Mononen Mika E, Tanska Petri, Nieminen Miika T, Korhonen Rami K, Saarakkala Simo
Research Unit of Medical Imaging, Physics and Technology, Faculty of Medicine, University of Oulu, Oulu, Finland; Medical Research Center, University of Oulu and Oulu University Hospital Oulu, Finland.
Department of Applied Physics, University of Eastern Finland, Kuopio, Finland.
J Biomech. 2016 Dec 8;49(16):3891-3900. doi: 10.1016/j.jbiomech.2016.10.025. Epub 2016 Oct 25.
The intricate properties of articular cartilage and the complexity of the loading environment are some of the key challenges in developing models for biomechanical analysis of the knee joint. Fibril-reinforced poroelastic (FRPE) material models have been reported to accurately capture characteristic responses of cartilage during dynamic and static loadings. However, high computational and time costs associated with such advanced models limit applicability of FRPE models when multiple subjects need to be analyzed. If choosing simpler material models, it is important to show that they can still produce truthful predictions. Therefore, the aim of this study was to compare depth-dependent maximum principal stresses and strains within articular cartilage in the 3D knee joint between FRPE material models and simpler isotropic elastic (IE), isotropic poroelastic (IPE) and transversely isotropic poroelastic (TIPE) material models during simulated gait cycle. When cartilage-cartilage contact pressures were matched between the models (15% allowed difference), maximum principal stresses in the IE, IPE and TIPE models were substantially lower than those in the FRPE model (by more than 50%, TIPE model being closest to the FRPE model), and stresses occurred only in compression in the IE model. Additional simulations were performed to find material parameters for the TIPE model (due to its anisotropic nature) that would yield maximum principal stresses similar to the FRPE model. The modified homogeneous TIPE model was in a better agreement with the homogeneous FRPE model, and the average and maximum differences in maximum principal stresses throughout the depth of cartilage were 7% and 9%, respectively, in the lateral compartment and 9% and 11% in the medial compartment. This study revealed that it is possible to match simultaneously maximum principal stresses and strains of cartilage between non-fibril-reinforced and fibril-reinforced knee joint models during gait. Depending on the research question (such as analysis of fibril strain necessitates the use of fibril-reinforced material models) or clinical demand (fast simulations with simpler material models), the choice of the material model should be done carefully.
关节软骨的复杂特性以及加载环境的复杂性是膝关节生物力学分析模型开发中的一些关键挑战。据报道,纤维增强多孔弹性(FRPE)材料模型能够准确捕捉软骨在动态和静态加载过程中的特征响应。然而,与这种先进模型相关的高计算成本和时间成本限制了FRPE模型在需要分析多个受试者时的适用性。如果选择更简单的材料模型,重要的是要证明它们仍然可以产生真实的预测。因此,本研究的目的是比较在模拟步态周期中,FRPE材料模型与更简单的各向同性弹性(IE)、各向同性多孔弹性(IPE)和横观各向同性多孔弹性(TIPE)材料模型在三维膝关节中关节软骨内深度相关的最大主应力和应变。当模型之间的软骨-软骨接触压力匹配时(允许有15%的差异),IE、IPE和TIPE模型中的最大主应力明显低于FRPE模型中的最大主应力(超过50%,TIPE模型最接近FRPE模型),并且IE模型中的应力仅在压缩时出现。进行了额外的模拟以找到TIPE模型(由于其各向异性性质)的材料参数,这些参数将产生与FRPE模型相似的最大主应力。修改后的均匀TIPE模型与均匀FRPE模型的一致性更好,在外侧间室中,整个软骨深度的最大主应力的平均差异和最大差异分别为7%和9%,在内侧间室中分别为9%和11%。本研究表明,在步态过程中,非纤维增强和纤维增强膝关节模型之间可以同时匹配软骨的最大主应力和应变。根据研究问题(例如纤维应变分析需要使用纤维增强材料模型)或临床需求(使用更简单材料模型进行快速模拟),应谨慎选择材料模型。