解剖精确有限元头部模型的区域应变响应

Tyler F. Rooks, J. Humm, J. Baisden, V. Chancey, N. Yoganandan
{"title":"解剖精确有限元头部模型的区域应变响应","authors":"Tyler F. Rooks, J. Humm, J. Baisden, V. Chancey, N. Yoganandan","doi":"10.1115/imece2021-67500","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n The need for an objective measure of injury in an area of the body that is difficult to study through experimental research methods combined with recent advancements in computational capabilities has led to a focus on development of detailed finite element models. Model development, anatomical detail, and injury metrics, however, varies widely. The purpose of this study was to benchmark the response of a newly developed anatomically accurate human brain model against the SIMon and GHBMC models and describe the predicted regional responses of the brain. The MCW-USAARL Head Injury Model (MUHIM) anatomy was developed using a neuroimaging atlas and neurosurgeon review. Material properties were obtained from literature. All three models were exercised using data from in-house laboratory tests that consisted of a helmeted head and neck mounted on a mini-sled device. Cumulative strain damage measure (CSDM) was calculated for each model using a strain threshold of 15, used in previous studies as a brain injury threshold. SIMon and GHBMC whole brain CSDM was 0.25 and 0.3 for the frontal and 0.40 and 0.3 for the lateral impact tests. Comparatively, whole brain CSDM from the MUHIM model was 0.27 for frontal tests and 0.45 for lateral tests. It is known that cognitive functions are region specific, and damage to one region may have specific neural sequela. Such regional or local metrics may explain different types of brain injuries.","PeriodicalId":314012,"journal":{"name":"Volume 5: Biomedical and Biotechnology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Regional Strain Response of an Anatomically Accurate Finite Element Head Model\",\"authors\":\"Tyler F. Rooks, J. Humm, J. Baisden, V. Chancey, N. Yoganandan\",\"doi\":\"10.1115/imece2021-67500\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\n The need for an objective measure of injury in an area of the body that is difficult to study through experimental research methods combined with recent advancements in computational capabilities has led to a focus on development of detailed finite element models. Model development, anatomical detail, and injury metrics, however, varies widely. The purpose of this study was to benchmark the response of a newly developed anatomically accurate human brain model against the SIMon and GHBMC models and describe the predicted regional responses of the brain. The MCW-USAARL Head Injury Model (MUHIM) anatomy was developed using a neuroimaging atlas and neurosurgeon review. Material properties were obtained from literature. All three models were exercised using data from in-house laboratory tests that consisted of a helmeted head and neck mounted on a mini-sled device. Cumulative strain damage measure (CSDM) was calculated for each model using a strain threshold of 15, used in previous studies as a brain injury threshold. SIMon and GHBMC whole brain CSDM was 0.25 and 0.3 for the frontal and 0.40 and 0.3 for the lateral impact tests. Comparatively, whole brain CSDM from the MUHIM model was 0.27 for frontal tests and 0.45 for lateral tests. It is known that cognitive functions are region specific, and damage to one region may have specific neural sequela. Such regional or local metrics may explain different types of brain injuries.\",\"PeriodicalId\":314012,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Volume 5: Biomedical and Biotechnology\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-11-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Volume 5: Biomedical and Biotechnology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1115/imece2021-67500\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Volume 5: Biomedical and Biotechnology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1115/imece2021-67500","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

摘要

由于人体某一部位的损伤很难通过实验研究方法进行研究,再加上最近计算能力的进步,因此需要对该部位的损伤进行客观测量,这导致了对详细有限元模型开发的关注。然而,模型发育、解剖细节和损伤指标差异很大。本研究的目的是对新开发的解剖学上准确的人脑模型与SIMon和GHBMC模型的反应进行基准测试,并描述预测的大脑区域反应。MCW-USAARL头部损伤模型(MUHIM)的解剖是通过神经成像图谱和神经外科医生的回顾来建立的。材料性质由文献获得。所有三种模型都使用内部实验室测试的数据进行了测试,其中包括安装在小型雪橇设备上的头盔头部和颈部。每个模型的累积应变损伤测量值(CSDM)使用应变阈值15计算,该阈值在以前的研究中用作脑损伤阈值。SIMon和GHBMC全脑CSDM额部分别为0.25和0.3,侧部分别为0.40和0.3。相比之下,MUHIM模型的全脑CSDM额部为0.27,侧部为0.45。众所周知,认知功能是区域特异性的,一个区域的损伤可能会产生特定的神经后遗症。这种区域性或地方性的指标可以解释不同类型的脑损伤。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Regional Strain Response of an Anatomically Accurate Finite Element Head Model
The need for an objective measure of injury in an area of the body that is difficult to study through experimental research methods combined with recent advancements in computational capabilities has led to a focus on development of detailed finite element models. Model development, anatomical detail, and injury metrics, however, varies widely. The purpose of this study was to benchmark the response of a newly developed anatomically accurate human brain model against the SIMon and GHBMC models and describe the predicted regional responses of the brain. The MCW-USAARL Head Injury Model (MUHIM) anatomy was developed using a neuroimaging atlas and neurosurgeon review. Material properties were obtained from literature. All three models were exercised using data from in-house laboratory tests that consisted of a helmeted head and neck mounted on a mini-sled device. Cumulative strain damage measure (CSDM) was calculated for each model using a strain threshold of 15, used in previous studies as a brain injury threshold. SIMon and GHBMC whole brain CSDM was 0.25 and 0.3 for the frontal and 0.40 and 0.3 for the lateral impact tests. Comparatively, whole brain CSDM from the MUHIM model was 0.27 for frontal tests and 0.45 for lateral tests. It is known that cognitive functions are region specific, and damage to one region may have specific neural sequela. Such regional or local metrics may explain different types of brain injuries.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Theoretical Evaluation of Heat Transfer in Liver Tumor Microwave Ablation Using a 10-Slot Antenna at High Frequencies Improving the Performance of Ambulatory Gait Training System for Rehabilitation by Mechatronics and Design Simulation Design of a Carbon Fiber Ankle Foot Orthotic With Optimal Joint Stiffness Effect of Shaking at or Near Resonance of a Simple Head Model on Skull/Brain Connectors Do Long Aorta Branches Impact on the Rheological Properties?
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1