Infoscience

Journal article

Theoretical bounds for the influence of tissue-level ductility on the apparent-level strength of human trabecular bone

The role of tissue-level post-yield behavior on the apparent-level strength of trabecular bone is a potentially important aspect of bone quality. To gain insight into this issue, we compared the apparent-level strength of trabecular bone for the hypothetical cases of fully brittle versus fully ductile failure behavior of the trabecular tissue. Twenty human cadaver trabecular bone specimens (5 mm cube; BV/TV=6-36%) were scanned with micro-CT to create 3D finite element models (22-micron element size). For each model, apparent-level strength was computed assuming either fully brittle (fracture with no tissue ductility) or fully ductile (yield with no tissue fracture) tissue-level behaviors. We found that the apparent-level ultimate strength for the brittle behavior was only about half the value of the apparent-level 0.2%-offset yield strength for the ductile behavior, and the ratio of these brittle to ductile strengths was almost constant (mean +/- SD=0.56 +/- 0.02; n=20; R-2=0.99 between the two measures). As a result of this small variation, although the ratio of brittle to ductile strengths was positively correlated with the bone volume fraction (R-2=0.44, p=0.01) and structure model index (SMI, R-2=0.58, p < 0.01), these effects were small. Mechanistically, the fully ductile behavior resulted in a much higher apparent-level strength because in this case about 16-fold more tissue was required to fail than for the fully brittle behavior; also, there was more tensile- than compressive-mode of failure at the tissue level for the fully brittle behavior. We conclude that, in theory, the apparent-level strength behavior of human trabecular bone can vary appreciably depending on whether the tissue fails in a fully ductile versus fully brittle manner, and this effect is largely constant despite appreciable variations in bone volume fraction and microarchitecture. (C) 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Fulltext

Related material

Contacts