{"title":"Surface-based versus voxel-based finite element head models: comparative analyses of strain responses.","authors":"Zhou Zhou, Xiaogai Li, Svein Kleiven","doi":"10.1007/s10237-025-01940-z","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Finite element (FE) models of the human head are important injury assessment tools but developing a high-quality, hexahedral-meshed FE head model without compromising geometric accuracy is a challenging task. Important brain features, such as the cortical folds and ventricles, were captured only in a handful of FE head models that were primarily developed from two meshing techniques, i.e., surface-based meshing with conforming elements to capture the interfacial boundaries and voxel-based meshing by converting the segmented voxels into elements with and without mesh smoothing. Despite these advancements, little knowledge existed of how similar the strain responses were between surface- and voxel-based FE head models. This study uniquely addressed this gap by presenting three anatomically detailed models - a surface-based model with conforming meshes to capture the cortical folds-subarachnoid cerebrospinal fluid and brain-ventricle interfaces, and two voxel-based models (with and without mesh smoothing) - derived from the same imaging dataset. All numerical settings in the three models were exactly the same, except for the meshes. These three models were employed to simulate head impacts. The results showed that, when calculating commonly used injury metrics, including the percentile strains below the maximum (e.g., 99 percentile strain) and the volume of brain element with the strain over certain thresholds, the responses of the three models were virtually identical. Different strain patterns existed between the surface- and the voxel-based models at the interfacial boundary (e.g., sulci and gyri in the cortex, regions adjacent to the falx and tentorium) with strain differences exceeding 0.1, but remarkable similarities were noted at the non-interfacial region. The mesh smoothing procedure marginally reduced the strain discrepancies between the voxel- and surface-based model. This study yielded new quantitative insights into the general similarity in the strain responses between the surface- and voxel-based FE head models and underscored that caution should be exercised when using the strain at the interface to predict injury.</p>","PeriodicalId":489,"journal":{"name":"Biomechanics and Modeling in Mechanobiology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Biomechanics and Modeling in Mechanobiology","FirstCategoryId":"5","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10237-025-01940-z","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"BIOPHYSICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Finite element (FE) models of the human head are important injury assessment tools but developing a high-quality, hexahedral-meshed FE head model without compromising geometric accuracy is a challenging task. Important brain features, such as the cortical folds and ventricles, were captured only in a handful of FE head models that were primarily developed from two meshing techniques, i.e., surface-based meshing with conforming elements to capture the interfacial boundaries and voxel-based meshing by converting the segmented voxels into elements with and without mesh smoothing. Despite these advancements, little knowledge existed of how similar the strain responses were between surface- and voxel-based FE head models. This study uniquely addressed this gap by presenting three anatomically detailed models - a surface-based model with conforming meshes to capture the cortical folds-subarachnoid cerebrospinal fluid and brain-ventricle interfaces, and two voxel-based models (with and without mesh smoothing) - derived from the same imaging dataset. All numerical settings in the three models were exactly the same, except for the meshes. These three models were employed to simulate head impacts. The results showed that, when calculating commonly used injury metrics, including the percentile strains below the maximum (e.g., 99 percentile strain) and the volume of brain element with the strain over certain thresholds, the responses of the three models were virtually identical. Different strain patterns existed between the surface- and the voxel-based models at the interfacial boundary (e.g., sulci and gyri in the cortex, regions adjacent to the falx and tentorium) with strain differences exceeding 0.1, but remarkable similarities were noted at the non-interfacial region. The mesh smoothing procedure marginally reduced the strain discrepancies between the voxel- and surface-based model. This study yielded new quantitative insights into the general similarity in the strain responses between the surface- and voxel-based FE head models and underscored that caution should be exercised when using the strain at the interface to predict injury.
期刊介绍:
Mechanics regulates biological processes at the molecular, cellular, tissue, organ, and organism levels. A goal of this journal is to promote basic and applied research that integrates the expanding knowledge-bases in the allied fields of biomechanics and mechanobiology. Approaches may be experimental, theoretical, or computational; they may address phenomena at the nano, micro, or macrolevels. Of particular interest are investigations that
(1) quantify the mechanical environment in which cells and matrix function in health, disease, or injury,
(2) identify and quantify mechanosensitive responses and their mechanisms,
(3) detail inter-relations between mechanics and biological processes such as growth, remodeling, adaptation, and repair, and
(4) report discoveries that advance therapeutic and diagnostic procedures.
Especially encouraged are analytical and computational models based on solid mechanics, fluid mechanics, or thermomechanics, and their interactions; also encouraged are reports of new experimental methods that expand measurement capabilities and new mathematical methods that facilitate analysis.