International Center for Automotive Medicine, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA.
Biomech Model Mechanobiol. 2020 Dec;19(6):2227-2239. doi: 10.1007/s10237-020-01335-2. Epub 2020 May 22.
Finite element human body models (HBMs) are used to assess injury risk in a variety of impact scenarios. The ribs are a key structural component within the chest, so their accuracy within HBMs is vitally important for modeling human biomechanics. We assessed the geometric correspondence between the ribs defined within five widely used HBMs and measures drawn from population-wide studies of rib geometry, focusing on (1) rib global shape, (2) rib cross-sectional size and shape, and (3) rib cortical bone thickness. A parametric global shape model fitted to all HBM ribs was compared to expected rib parameters calculated for each HBM's subject demographic using population reference data. The GHBMC M50 and THUMS M50 male HBMs showed 24% and 50% of their fitted rib shape parameters (6 parameters per each 12 ribs) falling outside 1SD from population expected values, respectively. For female models the GHBMC F05, THUMS F05, and VIVA F50 models had 21%, 26%, and 19% of their rib shape parameters falling outside 1SD, respectively. Cross-sectional areas and inertial moments obtained along the HBM ribs were compared to average ± 1SD corridors for male and female ribs drawn from reference population data. The GHBMC M50, THUMS M50, and VIVA F50 model ribs were all larger in overall cross-sectional area than their targeted average population values by 0.9SDs (average across the rib's full length), 1.7SDs, and 1.3SDs, respectfully. When considering cortical bone cross-sectional area, the THUMS and VIVA models-which each define a constant bone thickness value across the entire rib-overestimated bone content on average by 1.1SDs and 1.2SDs, respectively. HBMs have traditionally performed poorly when predicting rib fracture onset or fracture site, and in all HBMs in this study the rib regions with the most extreme cortical bone thickness and cross-sectional area discrepancies (compared to average reference data) corresponded to regions toward the sternal end of the ribs where rib fractures most frequently occur. Results from this study highlight geometrical components of current HBM ribs that differ from the rib geometry that would be expected from within those models' target demographics, and help researchers prioritize improvements to their biofidelity.
有限元人体模型(HBM)用于评估各种冲击场景下的损伤风险。肋骨是胸部的关键结构组成部分,因此它们在 HBM 中的准确性对于模拟人体生物力学至关重要。我们评估了五个广泛使用的 HBM 中定义的肋骨与来自肋骨几何形状的人群研究中得出的测量值之间的几何对应关系,重点关注 (1) 肋骨整体形状、(2) 肋骨横截面大小和形状,以及 (3) 肋骨皮质骨厚度。拟合到所有 HBM 肋骨的参数全局形状模型与使用人群参考数据为每个 HBM 的受试者人口统计数据计算的预期肋骨参数进行了比较。GHBMC M50 和 THUMS M50 男性 HBM 的拟合肋骨形状参数(每个 12 根肋骨 6 个参数)有 24%和 50%落在人群预期值的 1SD 之外。对于女性模型,GHBMC F05、THUMS F05 和 VIVA F50 模型分别有 21%、26%和 19%的肋骨形状参数落在 1SD 之外。沿着 HBM 肋骨获得的横截面面积和转动惯量与从参考人群数据中得出的男性和女性肋骨的平均±1SD 走廊进行了比较。GHBMC M50、THUMS M50 和 VIVA F50 模型肋骨的整体横截面面积都比其目标人群平均值大 0.9SD(沿肋骨全长平均)、1.7SD 和 1.3SD。考虑皮质骨横截面面积时,THUMS 和 VIVA 模型——每个模型都在整个肋骨上定义了一个恒定的骨厚度值——分别平均高估了 1.1SD 和 1.2SD 的骨含量。HBM 在预测肋骨骨折发作或骨折部位时一直表现不佳,在本研究中的所有 HBM 中,皮质骨厚度和横截面面积差异最大的肋骨区域(与平均参考数据相比)与肋骨最常发生骨折的胸骨端相对应。这项研究的结果突出了当前 HBM 肋骨与这些模型目标人群所期望的肋骨几何形状不同的几何组成部分,并帮助研究人员确定提高其生物逼真度的优先级。