2018
DOI: 10.1016/j.jtbi.2018.03.009
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

In silico modeling of bone adaptation to rest-inserted loading: Strain energy density versus fluid flow as stimulus

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

0
8
0
1

Year Published

2019
2019
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
5
4
1

Relationship

2
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 23 publications
(9 citation statements)
references
References 70 publications
0
8
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…While SED is widely used as a mathematical term to describe the mechanical signal influencing bone (re)modeling ( Huiskes et al, 2000 ; Schulte et al, 2013 ; Birkhold et al, 2017 ; Cheong et al, 2020 ), other mechanical signals, such as interstitial fluid flow through the lacuna-canalicular network (LCN), are also known to play a major role in determining the local mechanical environment surrounding osteocytes, the main mechanosensors in bone ( Fritton and Weinbaum, 2008 ; Weinbaum et al, 2011 ; Klein-Nulend et al, 2013 ). In this respect, it has been suggested that measures of fluid flow, such as the gradient in SED, would allow improved predictions of adaptive bone (re)modeling events ( Webster et al, 2015 ; Tiwari et al, 2018 ). In this study, we therefore aimed to (1) investigate the effects of varying loading frequencies on the mechano-regulation of trabecular bone in mouse caudal vertebrae, (2) assess whether adaptive bone (re)modeling can be linked to mechanical signals in the local in vivo environment and (3) compare the modeling performance of SED and the gradient in SED for the prediction of local bone formation and resorption events on the tissue level.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…While SED is widely used as a mathematical term to describe the mechanical signal influencing bone (re)modeling ( Huiskes et al, 2000 ; Schulte et al, 2013 ; Birkhold et al, 2017 ; Cheong et al, 2020 ), other mechanical signals, such as interstitial fluid flow through the lacuna-canalicular network (LCN), are also known to play a major role in determining the local mechanical environment surrounding osteocytes, the main mechanosensors in bone ( Fritton and Weinbaum, 2008 ; Weinbaum et al, 2011 ; Klein-Nulend et al, 2013 ). In this respect, it has been suggested that measures of fluid flow, such as the gradient in SED, would allow improved predictions of adaptive bone (re)modeling events ( Webster et al, 2015 ; Tiwari et al, 2018 ). In this study, we therefore aimed to (1) investigate the effects of varying loading frequencies on the mechano-regulation of trabecular bone in mouse caudal vertebrae, (2) assess whether adaptive bone (re)modeling can be linked to mechanical signals in the local in vivo environment and (3) compare the modeling performance of SED and the gradient in SED for the prediction of local bone formation and resorption events on the tissue level.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…While SED is widely used as a mathematical term to describe the mechanical signal influencing bone remodeling [15,[19][20][21], other mechanical signals, such as interstitial fluid flow through the lacuna-canalicular network (LCN), are also known to play a major role in determining the local mechanical environment surrounding osteocytes, the main mechanosensors in bone [22][23][24]. In this respect, it has been suggested that measures of fluid flow, such as the gradient in SED, would allow improved predictions of adaptive bone remodeling events [16,25]. In this study, we therefore aimed to 1) investigate the effects of varying loading frequencies on the mechano-regulation of trabecular bone in mouse caudal vertebrae, 2) assess whether adaptive bone remodeling can be linked to mechanical signals in the local in vivo environment and 3) compare the modeling performance of SED and the gradient in SED for the prediction of local bone formation and resorption events on the tissue level.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Student’s t -test and Watson U 2 goodness of fit test results showed in Table 8 support that the model has been able to closely predict the site-specific new bone formation at periosteal surface. The prediction is also improved at the endocoritcal surface in comparison to the models available in the literature (Tiwari and Prasad, 23 Prasad and Goyal, 27 and Tiwari et al 42 ). In addition, this study in fact validates the relation between spatial distribution of strain gradients and site-specific new bone distribution for different loading cases which was suggested as a future work in Gross et al 22 These findings may be useful in explaining how site-specific osteogenesis is regulated through mechanical environment.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 77%