Advertisement

Computation of Brain Deformations Due to Violent Impact: Quantitative Analysis of the Importance of the Choice of Boundary Conditions and Brain Tissue Constitutive Model

  • Fang WangEmail author
  • Zhengyang Geng
  • Sudip Agrawal
  • Yong Han
  • Karol Miller
  • Adam Wittek
Conference paper

Abstract

The objective of this study is to quantify the effects of approach for modelling the brain-skull interface and constitutive model of the brain parenchyma on predicting the brain deformations using a previously validated finite element head-brain model (Total HUman Model for Safety, THUMS, was used). Four approaches for modelling of the brain-skull interface and two constitutive models (linear viscoelastic and Odgen hyperviscoelastic) of the brain tissue were employed in computer simulations of the experiments reported in the literature. Comparison of the predicted and experimentally determined magnitude and shape of trajectories of selected points within the brain as well as the maximum principal and shear strain within the brain was conducted. The comparison indicates that the predicted brain responses were strongly affected by both analysed factors. The results suggest that accurate prediction of brain deformations due to violent impact requires a model of the brain-skull interface that allows for movement between the brain outer surface and skull, while preventing complete separation between the brain and skull, and constitutive model that accounts for non-linear stress-strain relationship of the brain tissues.

Keywords

Brain-skull interface Computational modelling Constitutive model Brain deformation Finite element analysis 

Notes

Acknowledgements

This work is financially supported by Xiamen University of Technology (Grant No. YKJ15006R) and Fujian Administration of Foreign (Overseas) Experts Affairs (Grant No. 2015-79). Sudip Agrawal was supported by Australian Postgraduate Award programme and The University of Western Australia Safety-Net Top-Up Scholarship. All simulations using Toyota Total HUman Model for Safety THUMS Version 4.0 in this study were conducted at Xiamen University of Technology.

References

  1. 1.
    Peeters W, van den Brande R, Polinder S, Brazinova A, Steyerberg EW, Lingsma HF, Maas AI (2015) Epidemiology of traumatic brain injury in Europe. Acta Neurochir 157:1683–1696CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    de Almeida CER, de Sousa Filho JL, Dourado JC, Gontijo PAM, Dellaretti MA, Costa BS (2016) Traumatic brain injury epidemiology in Brazil. World Neurosurg 87:540–547CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Yang KH, King AI (2011) Modeling of the brain for injury simulation and prevention. In: Miller K (ed) Biomechanics of the brain. Springer, New York, pp 90–110Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Zhang L, Yang KH, Dwarampudi R, Omori K, Li T, Chang K, Hardy WN, Khalil TB, King AI (2001) Recent advances in brain injury research: a new human head model development and validation. Stapp Car Crash J 45:369–394Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Yang J, Xu W, Otte D (2008) Brain injury biomechanics in real world vehicle accident using mathematical models. Chin J Mech 32:81–86CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Kleiven S, Hardy WN (2002) Correlation of an FE model of the human head with local brain motion: consequences for injury prediction. Stapp Car Crash J 46:123–144Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Miller K, Wittek A, Joldes G, Horton A, Dutta-Roy T, Berger J, Morriss L (2010) Modelling brain deformations for computer-integrated neurosurgery. Int J Numer Meth Bio 26:117–138CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Mao H, Zhang L, Jiang B, Genthikatti VV, Jin X, Zhu F, Makwana R, Gill A, Jandir G, Singh A, Yang KH (2013) Development of a finite element human head model partially validated with thirty five experimental cases. J Biomech Eng 135:111002CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Miller K (2011) In: Miller K (ed) Biomechanics of the brain. Springer, New YorkCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Miller K, Chinzei K, Orssengo G, Bednarz P (2000) Mechanical properties of brain tissue in-vivo: experiment and computer simulation. J Biomech 33:1369–1376CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Miller K, Chinzei K (2002) Mechanical properties of brain tissue in tension. J Biomech 35:483–490CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Rashid B, Destrade M, Gilchrist MD (2013) Mechanical characterization of brain tissue in simple shear at dynamic strain rates. J Mech Behav Biomed 28:71–85CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Bilston LE (2011) In: Bilston LE (ed) Neural tissue biomechanics: studies in mechanobiology, tissue engineering and biomaterials. Spinger-Verlag, BerlinCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Wittek A, Grosland NM, Joldes GR, Magnotta V, Miller K (2016) From finite element meshes to clouds of points: a review of methods for generation of computational biomechanics models for patient-specific applications. Ann Biomed Eng 44:3–15CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Wittek A, Omori K (2003) Parametric study of effects of brain-skull boundary conditions and brain material properties on responses of simplified finite element brain model under angular acceleration in sagittal plane. JSME Int J 46:1388–1398CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Bayly PV, Clayton EH, Genin GM (2012) Quantitative imaging methods for the development and validation of brain biomechanics models. Annu Rev Biomed Eng 14:369–396CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Jin X, Mao H, Yang KH, King AI (2014) Constitutive modeling of pia–arachnoid complex. Ann Biomed Eng 42:812–821CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Jin X (2009) Biomechanical response and constitutive modeling of bovine pia-arachnoid complex. Dissertation, Wayne State UniversityGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Jin X, Yang KH, King AI (2011) Mechanical properties of bovine pia–arachnoid complex in shear. J Biomech 44:467–474CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Al-Bsharat AS, Hardy WN, Yang KH, Khalil TB, Tashman S, King AI (1999) Brain/skull relative displacement magnitude due to blunt head impact, In: Proceedings of the 1999 43rd Stapp Car Crash Conference, San Diego, CA, USAGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Miller RT, Margulies SS, Leoni M, Nonaka M, Chen X, Smith DH, D.F. Meaney (1998) Finite element modeling approaches for predicting injury in an experimental model of severe diffuse axonal injury. SAE Technical Paper, No. 983154Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Agrawal S, Wittek A, Joldes G, Bunt S, Miller K (2015) Mechanical properties of brain-skull Interface in compression. In: Doyle B, Miller K, Wittek A, Nielsen PMF (eds) Computational biomechanics for medicine. Springer International Publishing, New York, pp 83–91Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Claessens M, Sauren F, Wismans J (1997) Modeling of the human head under impact conditions: a parametric study. SAE Technical Paper, No. 973338, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Yang J (2011) Investigation of brain trauma biomechanics in vehicle traffic accidents using human body computational models. In: Wittek A, Nielsen PMF, Miller K (eds) Computational biomechanics for medicine. Springer, New York, pp 5–14CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Shigeta K, Kitagawa Y, Yasuki T (2009) Development of next generation human FE model capable of organ injury prediction, In: International technical conference on the enhanced safety of vehicles (ESV), Stuttgart, GermanyGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Watanabe R, Miyazaki H, Kitagawa Y, Yasuki T (2011) Research of collision speed dependency of pedestrian head and chest injuries using human FE model (THUMS version 4), In: Proceedings of the 22nd Enhanced Safety of Vehicles (ESV) co nference, Washington DC, USAGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Mao H, Zhang L, Yang KH, King AI (2006) Application of a finite element model of the brain to study traumatic brain injury mechanisms in the rat. Stapp Car Crash J 50:583Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Takhounts EG, Craig MJ, Moorhouse K, McFadden J, Hasija V (2013) Development of brain injury criteria (BrIC). Stapp Car Crash J 57:243Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Haines DE, Harkey HL, Al-Mefty O (1993) The “subdural” space: a new look at an outdated concept. Neurosurgery 32:111–120CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Hardy WN, Foster CD, Mason MJ, Yang KH, King AI, Tashman S (2001) Investigation of head injury mechanisms using neutral density technology and high-speed biplanar X-ray. Stapp Car Crash J 45:337–368Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Hardy WN (2007) Response of the human cadaver head to impact. Dissertation, Wayne State UnivesityGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Garlapati R, Roy A, Joldes G, Wittek A, Mostayed A, Doyle B, Warfield S, Kikinis R, Knuckey N, Bunt S, Miller K (2014) More accurate neuronavigation data provided by biomechanical modeling instead of rigid registration. J Neurosurg 120:1477–1483CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Miller K, Chinzei K (1997) Constitutive modelling of brain tissue: experiment and theory. J Biomech 30:1115–1121CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Wittek A, Dutta-Roy T, Taylor Z, Horton A, Washio T, Chinzei K, Miller K (2008) Subject-specific non-linear biomechanical model of needle insertion into brain. Comput Method Biomech 11:135–146CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Wittek A, Miller K, Kikinis R, Warfield SK (2007) Patient-specific model of brain deformation: application to medical image registration. J Biomech 40:919–929CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Antona-Makoshi J (2013) Reanalysis of primate head impact experiments to clarify mild traumatic brain injury kinematics and thresholds. Dissertation, Chalmers University of TechnologyGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Hu J, Jin X, Lee JB, Zhang L, Chaudhary V, Guthikonda M, Yang KH, King AI (2007) Intraoperative brain shift prediction using a 3D inhomogeneous patient-specific finite element model. J Neurosurg 106:164–169CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Wittek A, Joldes G, Couton M, Warfield SK, Miller K (2010) Patient-specific non-linear finite element modelling for predicting soft organ deformation in real-time; application to non-rigid neuroimage registration. Prog Biophys Mol Biol 103:292–303CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Mazumder MMG, Miller K, Bunt S, Mostayed A, Joldes G, Day R, Hart R, Wittek A (2013) Mechanical properties of the brain–skull interface. Acta Bioengin Biomech 15:3–11Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • Fang Wang
    • 1
    Email author
  • Zhengyang Geng
    • 1
  • Sudip Agrawal
    • 2
  • Yong Han
    • 1
  • Karol Miller
    • 2
    • 3
  • Adam Wittek
    • 2
  1. 1.School of Mechanical and Automotive EngineeringXiamen University of TechnologyXiamenChina
  2. 2.Intelligent Systems for Medicine Laboratory, School of Mechanical and Chemical EngineeringThe University of Western AustraliaPerthAustralia
  3. 3.Institute of Mechanics and Advanced MaterialsCardiff UniversityCardiffUK

Personalised recommendations