2018
DOI: 10.1016/j.actbio.2018.08.001
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Young’s modulus of trabecular bone at the tissue level: A review

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

9
53
0
1

Year Published

2019
2019
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
8

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 131 publications
(63 citation statements)
references
References 104 publications
9
53
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…For the mFE analyses, the default Young’s modulus of 10 GPa provided accurate results. This value is in good agreement with values reported from bending, tension, and nanoindentation test of wet human trabecular bone [16] but is considerably lower than values typically reported for cortical bone (~ 19 GPa). It is also less than the value found when comparing the stiffness of elastic specimens obtained from micro-FE models with experimental measurement [16, 17].…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 90%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…For the mFE analyses, the default Young’s modulus of 10 GPa provided accurate results. This value is in good agreement with values reported from bending, tension, and nanoindentation test of wet human trabecular bone [16] but is considerably lower than values typically reported for cortical bone (~ 19 GPa). It is also less than the value found when comparing the stiffness of elastic specimens obtained from micro-FE models with experimental measurement [16, 17].…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 90%
“…This value is in good agreement with values reported from bending, tension, and nanoindentation test of wet human trabecular bone [16] but is considerably lower than values typically reported for cortical bone (~ 19 GPa). It is also less than the value found when comparing the stiffness of elastic specimens obtained from micro-FE models with experimental measurement [16, 17]. Possible explanations for this discrepancy are the limited resolution of the models, the chosen threshold settings that will still result in some overestimation of the BV/TV [18], and the restrictive boundary condition used that can lead to an overestimation of the model stiffness (and hence underestimation of the tissue Young’s modulus) [19].…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 90%
“…The highest value of Young's modulus 9.39 ± 0.71 GPa was observed for the annealed composite with 50 wt% of HAp. This value is close to the values of the human femur 34–36 and tibia 35,37 bone tissue nanoindentation, which confirms the potential successful osteointegration of such material in terms of load distribution and reducing the effect of stress shielding. Presumably, the growth of Young's modulus with an increase in the HAp weight fraction means reinforcing effect in the polymer matrix as a result of the homogeneous distribution of highly dispersed HAp powder assisted with HAp powder mechanical activation during mixing with PLLA solution.…”
Section: Resultssupporting
confidence: 84%
“…Thus, the cells are in contact with biocompatible material of same stiffness as an osteointegrating bone. [59][60][61] The stiffness increased toward to bulk cpTi material. We can assume that by removing the mechanically incompatible transition we extend the life of the implant by limiting the micro-motions occurring on the ramp change of stiffness at the interface between bone and bulk titanium.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%