Surface-based versus voxel-based finite element head models: comparative analyses of strain responses.

IF 3 3区 医学 Q2 BIOPHYSICS
Zhou Zhou, Xiaogai Li, Svein Kleiven
{"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.

基于表面与基于体素的有限元头部模型:应变响应的比较分析。
人类头部的有限元模型是重要的损伤评估工具,但在不影响几何精度的情况下建立高质量的六面体网格头部有限元模型是一项具有挑战性的任务。重要的大脑特征,如皮质褶皱和脑室,仅在少数FE头部模型中被捕获,这些模型主要由两种网格划分技术开发,即基于表面的网格划分与符合的元素来捕获界面边界,以及基于体素的网格划分,通过将分割的体素转换为有或没有网格平滑的元素。尽管取得了这些进展,但对于基于表面和基于体素的有限元头部模型之间应变响应的相似程度知之甚少。本研究通过提出三种解剖细节模型来独特地解决这一差距——一种基于表面的模型,具有一致的网格来捕获皮质褶皱-蛛网膜下腔脑脊液和脑室界面,以及两个基于体素的模型(有和没有网格平滑)——来自相同的成像数据集。除了网格外,三个模型中的所有数值设置都完全相同。这三种模型分别用于模拟头部碰撞。结果表明,当计算常用的损伤指标时,包括低于最大值的百分位应变(例如,99百分位应变)和应变超过一定阈值的脑单元体积,三种模型的响应几乎相同。基于面素和体素的模型在界面边界(如皮层的脑沟和脑回,镰和幕相邻区域)存在不同的应变模式,应变差异超过0.1,但在非界面区域存在显著的相似性。网格平滑过程略微减少了基于体素和基于表面的模型之间的应变差异。该研究为基于表面和基于体素的有限元头部模型之间应变响应的普遍相似性提供了新的定量见解,并强调在使用界面应变预测损伤时应谨慎。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Biomechanics and Modeling in Mechanobiology
Biomechanics and Modeling in Mechanobiology 工程技术-工程:生物医学
CiteScore
7.10
自引率
8.60%
发文量
119
审稿时长
6 months
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.
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信