Obaeed, N., Hamdan, W. (2024). Validation of the simulation implant design approach based on ct scan images and the biomechanical performance response of rehabilitated skull bones. , 42(12), 1435-1445. doi: 10.30684/etj.2024.148915.1735
Nareen H. Obaeed; Wisam K. Hamdan. "Validation of the simulation implant design approach based on ct scan images and the biomechanical performance response of rehabilitated skull bones". , 42, 12, 2024, 1435-1445. doi: 10.30684/etj.2024.148915.1735
Obaeed, N., Hamdan, W. (2024). 'Validation of the simulation implant design approach based on ct scan images and the biomechanical performance response of rehabilitated skull bones', , 42(12), pp. 1435-1445. doi: 10.30684/etj.2024.148915.1735
Obaeed, N., Hamdan, W. Validation of the simulation implant design approach based on ct scan images and the biomechanical performance response of rehabilitated skull bones. , 2024; 42(12): 1435-1445. doi: 10.30684/etj.2024.148915.1735

Validation of the simulation implant design approach based on ct scan images and the biomechanical performance response of rehabilitated skull bones

Engineering and Technology Journal
Volume 42, Issue 12, December 2024, Pages 1435-1445    PDF (862.66 K)
Document Type: Research Paper
DOI: 10.30684/etj.2024.148915.1735
Authors
Nareen H. Obaeed* 1; Wisam K. Hamdan2
1Production Engineering and Metallurgy Dept., University of Technology-Iraq, Alsina’a street, 10066 Baghdad, Iraq.
2Biomedical Engineering Dept., University of Technology-Iraq, Alsina’a street, 10066 Baghdad, Iraq.
Abstract
Appropriate cranial implants are essential due to a worldwide population that is aging and the rising incidence of trauma. One key element affecting cranial implants' performance is their biomechanical behavior in human skull bones. This paper describes a high-quality cranial implant design approach for the defective skull based on computed tomography CT scan images and the biomechanical performance analysis of rehabilitation human skull bones. The valuable contribution of this work is the effective utilization of finite element analysis FEA to contrast the material behaviors of Polymethylmethacrylate PMMA cranial implants and autologous skull bone during rehabilitation as exposed to external trauma. The external loads applied in the implant's center are attached to a damaged cranium (300, 600, and 1000 N). The findings indicated that the equivalent stresses of PMMA are close to the skull bone. Minimum and maximum Von Mises stresses are (13 and 47 MPa) when employing a PMMA implant material and (12 and 41 MPa) when utilizing autologous skull bone at the lowest and highest level of applied force (300 and 1000 N), respectively. In terms of deformation distribution (0.02 and 0.03 mm) at applying 300 N, approximately six times the weight of a human head when the reconstruction is performed by skull bone and PMMA, respectively. So, this study will offer an insightful look at the neurocranial protection of PMMA implants that provide the coupling of skull bone-PMMA cranial implant, which guarantees adequate protection for the internal structures of the restored area similar to the autologous skull bone.

Highlights
  • A high-quality, patient-specific cranial implant was designed using computed tomography (CT) images.
  • Finite element analysis (FEA) was used to assess stress distribution and deformation in biomechanics.
  • A biomechanical comparison of autologous skull bone and polymethylmethacrylate implants was conducted.
Keywords
Cranioplasty; Polymethylmethacrylate PMMA; Finite element analysis; Cranial implant; Mechanical properties
References
  1. Wu, L. Ma , Q. Liu, L. Feng, Z. Wang, A. Ohrndorf, H. Christ, J. Xiong, Impact response and energy absorption of human skull cellular bones, J. Mech. Behav. Biomed. Mater., 81(2018)106–119. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmbbm.2018.02.018
  2. Popp, G. Rusu, S. Gabriel Racz, I. Popp, Force and thickness prediction with FEA of the cranial implants manufactured through SPIF, MATEC Web Conf., 290 (2019) 4–11. https://doi.org/10.1051/matecconf/201929004008
  3. Motherway, P. Verschueren, G. Perre, J. Sloten, M. Gilchrist, The mechanical properties of cranial bone: The effect of loading rate and cranial sampling position, J. Biomech., 42 (2009) 2129–2135. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbiomech.2009.05.030
  4. K. Vallittu, K. M. J. Aitasalo, A. A. Mäkitie, P. Helén, C. Lindqvist, Reconstruction of cranial bone defects with fiber-reinforced composite–bioactive glass implants, (2015).
  5. Bogu, Y. Kumar, A. Khanra, Homogenous scaffold-based cranial/skull implant modelling and structural analysis—unit cell algorithm-meshless approach, Med. Biol. Eng. Comput., 55 (2017) 2053–2065. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11517-017-1649-3
  6. Elshirbiny, A. Ahmed, M. Amen, Autograft cranioplasty for skull defects in children, Interdiscip. Neurosurg., 33 (2023) 101789. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.inat.2023.101789
  7. Basu, N. Bhaskar , S. Barui, V. Sharma , S. Das , N. Govindarajan, P. Hegde , P. Perikal , M. Shivakumar , K. Khanapure A. Jagannatha., Evaluation of implant properties, safety profile and clinical efficacy of patient-specific acrylic prosthesis in cranioplasty using 3D binderjet printed cranium model: A pilot study, J. Clin. Neurosci., 85 (2021) 132–142. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jocn.2020.12.020
  8. Moiduddin, S. Mian, H. Alkhalefah, S. Ramalingam, A. Sayeed, Customized Cost-Effective Cranioplasty for Large Asymmetrical Defects, Processes, 11(2023)1760. https://doi.org/10.3390/pr11061760
  9. Abd El-Ghani, Cranioplasty with polymethyl methacrylate implant: solutions of pitfalls, Egypt. J. Neurosurg., 33 (2018) 1-4. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41984-018-0002-y
  10. Sable, M. Patel, K. Shah, A Prospective Comparative Study of Different Methods of Cranioplasty: Our Institutional Experience, Indian J. Neurosurg., 09 (2020) 17–23. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0039-3402929
  11. Kwarcinski, P. Boughton, A. Ruys, A. Doolan, J. Gelder, Cranioplasty and craniofacial reconstruction: A review of implant material, manufacturing method and infection risk, Appl. Sci., 7 (2017) 276. https://doi.org/10.3390/app7030276
  12. N.T. Kim, C.X. Binh, V.T. Dung, T.V. Toan‏, Design and mechanical evaluation of a large cranial implant and fixation parts, Interdiscip. Neurosurg., 31 (2023) 101676. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.inat.2022.101676
  13. Huang, S. Zhong, S. Susarla, E. Swanson, J. Huang, C. Gordon, Craniofacial Reconstruction With Poly (Methyl Methacrylate) Customized Cranial Implants, J. Craniofac. Surg., 26 (2015) 64–70. https://doi.org/10.1097/SCS.0000000000001315
  14. Obaeed, W. Hamdan, Optimizing Fused Deposition Modelling Process Parameters for Medical Grade Polymethylmethacrylate Flexural Strength, Adv. Sci. Technol. Res. J., 18 (2024) 349–359. https://doi.org/10.12913/22998624/182876
  15. Khader, M. Towler, Materials and techniques used in cranioplasty fixation: A review, Mater. Sci. Eng. C, 66 (2016) 315–322. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.msec.2016.04.101
  16. Jegadeesan, M. Baldia, B. Basu, Next-generation personalized cranioplasty treatment, Acta Biomater., 154 (2022) 63–82. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actbio.2022.10.030
  17. Shah, H. Jung, S. Skirboll, Materials used in cranioplasty: A history and analysis, J. Neurosurg., 36 (2014) 1–7. https://doi.org/10.3171/2014.2.FOCUS13561
  18. I. Martmez-Valencia, C. H. Navarro, J. A. Vazquez-Lopez, J. L. Hernandez-Arellano, J. A. Jimenez-Garda, and J. L. Dfaz-Leon, Optimization of titanium cranial implant designs using generalized reduced gradient method, analysis of finite elements, and artificial neural networks, Rev. Int. Metod. Numer. para Calc. y Disen. enIng., 38 (2022) 1-16. https://doi.org/10.23967/j.rimni.2022.06.004
  19. Moiduddin, S. Mian, U. Umer, H. Alkhalefah, Fabrication and analysis of a Ti6Al4V implant for cranial restoration, Appl. Sci., 9 (2019) 2513 . https://doi.org/10.3390/app9122513
  20. Chamrad L. Borak, Finite Element Analysis Of Cranial Implant, 22nd International Conference Engineering Mechanics, October, 2016.
  21. Ameen, A. Al-Ahmari, M. Mohammed, O. Abdulhameed, U. Umer, K. Moiduddin, Design, finite element analysis (FEA), and fabrication of custom titanium alloy cranial implant using electron beam melting additive manufacturing, Adv. Prod. Eng. Manag., 13 (2018) 267–278. https://doi.org/10.14743/apem2018.3.289
  22. Santos, G. Carmo, R. Alves, F. Fernandes, M. Ptak, Mechanical Strength Study of a Cranial Implant Using Computational Tools, Appl. Sci., 12 (2022) 878. https://doi.org/10.3390/app12020878
  23. Moncayo-Matute, E. Vázquez-Silva, P. Peña-Tapia, P. Torres-Jara, D. Moya-Loaiza, T. Viloria-Ávila, Finite Element Analysis of Patient-Specific 3D-Printed Cranial Implant Manufactured with PMMA and PEEK: A Mechanical Comparative Study, Polymers, 15 (2023) 3620. https://doi.org/10.3390/polym15173620
  24. Mejía Rodríguez, O. González-Estrada, D. Villegas-Bermúdez, Finite Element Analysis of Patient-Specific Cranial Implants under Different Design Parameters for Material Selection, Designs, 8 (2024)1-13 . https://doi.org/10.3390/designs8020031
  25. Egger, M. Gall, A. Tax, M. Ücal, X. Li, G. Campe, U. Schäfer, D. Schmalstieg, X. Chen., Interactive reconstructions of cranial 3D implants under MeVisLab as an alternative to commercial planning software, PLoS One, 12 (2017)1-20 . https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0172694
  26. Arango-Ospina C. Cortés-Rodriguez, Engineering Design and Manufacturing of Custom Craniofacial Implants, The 15th International Conference on Biomedical Engineering, 43, 2014, 908–911. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-02913-9_234
  27. Obaeed, Numerical and Experimental Explorations for the Formability of Drawing Square Cups Through Deep Drawing Operation , Eng. Technol. J., 38 (2020) 1316–1326. https://doi.org/10.30684/etj.v38i9A.1340/4.0
  28. Al-Ahmari, E. Nasr, K. Moiduddin, S. Anwar, M. Al Kindi, A. Kamrani, A comparative study on the customized design of mandibular reconstruction plates using finite element method, Adv. Mech. Eng., 7 (2015) 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1177/1687814015593890
  29. Mian, K. Moiduddin, S. Elseufy, H. Alkhalefah, Adaptive Mechanism for Designing a Personalized Cranial Implant and its 3d printing using peek, Polymers , 14 (2022) 1266 . https://doi.org/10.3390/polym14061266
  30. Sukindar, N. Samsudin, S. Shaharuddin, S. Kamaruddin, The Effects of FDM Printing Parameters on the Compression Properties of Polymethylmethacrylate (PMMA) using Finite Element Analysis, Int. J. Integr. Eng., 14 (2022) 86–92. https://doi.org/10.30880/ijie.2022.14.02.013
  31. Moncayo-Matute, P. Peña-Tapia, E. Vázquez-Silva, P. Torres-Jara, D. Moya-Loaiza, G. Abad-Farfán, A. Andrade-Galarza, Surgical planning and finite element analysis for the neurocraneal protection in cranioplasty with PMMA: A case study, Nati. Lib. Medicine, 8 (2022) e10706. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2022.e10706
  32. Moncayo-Matute, E. Vázquez-Silva, P. Torres-Jara, P. Peña-Tapia, D. Moya-Loayza, G. Abad-Farán, Mechanical analysis for personalized implant for neurocranial protection manufactured with Polymethylmethacrylate, J. Phys. Conf. Ser., 2516 (2023) 012005. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/2516/1/012005
Statistics
Article View: 952
PDF Download: 312


Journal Management System. Powered by iJournalPro.com