2012
DOI: 10.1016/j.jmbbm.2011.09.013
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Towards child versus adult brain mechanical properties

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

3
61
0

Year Published

2012
2012
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
8
1
1

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 75 publications
(64 citation statements)
references
References 24 publications
3
61
0
Order By: Relevance
“…This range of moduli is very similar to ex vivo infant brain material properties published by others at shear strains of 0.5% to 50% and shear strain rates of 0.1s −1 to 8.33s −1 . (Chatelin et al 2012; Prange and Margulies 2002; Thibault and Margulies 1998) These studies demonstrated that shear testing across a range of strain magnitudes at constant strain rate produced little change in the infant shear modulus, suggesting that the infant shear modulus is insensitive to shear strain magnitude. (Prange and Margulies 2002; Thibault and Margulies 1998) Our study goes a step further to reveal that initial shear modulus values at high strain rates are very similar to those measured during ex vivo testing at substantially lower rates, demonstrating that the infant shear modulus is also relatively insensitive to strain rate.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 93%
“…This range of moduli is very similar to ex vivo infant brain material properties published by others at shear strains of 0.5% to 50% and shear strain rates of 0.1s −1 to 8.33s −1 . (Chatelin et al 2012; Prange and Margulies 2002; Thibault and Margulies 1998) These studies demonstrated that shear testing across a range of strain magnitudes at constant strain rate produced little change in the infant shear modulus, suggesting that the infant shear modulus is insensitive to shear strain magnitude. (Prange and Margulies 2002; Thibault and Margulies 1998) Our study goes a step further to reveal that initial shear modulus values at high strain rates are very similar to those measured during ex vivo testing at substantially lower rates, demonstrating that the infant shear modulus is also relatively insensitive to strain rate.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 93%
“…Several researchers used small surrogate animal brain to conduct tests [36][37][38][39][40]. It is also worth to mention that Chatelin et al [41] conducted oscillatory shear experiments using limited number of pediatric human brain samples at four age groups to investigate the effects of age and region on viscoelastic properties of human brain tissues. Although the aforementioned efforts have been made, age effects cannot be well established in the pediatric skull and brain due to limited number of sample size and large variations among those studies.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…There have been several experimental studies of human brain tissue (Chatelin et al, 2012;Donnelly and Medige, 1997;Fallenstein et al, 1969;Franceschini et al, 2006;Kruse et al, 2008;Nicolle et al, 2004;Prange and Margulies, 2002;Prange et al, 2000;Sack et al, 2008Sack et al, , 2009Schiavone et al, 2009). However, with the exception of a few of these aforementioned studies (Franceschini et al, 2006;Prange and Margulies, 2002;Prange et al, 2000), each reported single-mode experiments, with tests in just tension, compression, or shear.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%