Back

Prediction of compressive strength of vertebral body with metastatic lesions based on quantitative computed tomography-based subject-specific finite element models

Ghosh, R.; Shearman, E.; Roger, R.; Palanca, M.; Dall'Ara, E.; Lacroix, D.

2026-03-05 bioengineering
10.64898/2026.03.03.709247 bioRxiv
Show abstract

Pathologic vertebral fractures are a major complication in metastatic spine disease. However, current clinical scores, such as Spinal Instability Neoplastic Score (SINS), show limited predictive capability, particularly within the indeterminate range where most clinical uncertainty lies. This study aimed to develop and evaluate quantitative computed tomography (qCT)-based subject-specific finite element (SSFE) models to predict vertebral strength in presence of different metastatic lesion types. Twelve ex vivo human spine segments, each containing one metastatic (n=12) and one adjacent control vertebra (n=12), were scanned using qCT and calibrated using a calibration phantom. Homogenised nonlinear finite element models were developed with spatially heterogeneous, isotropic, density-dependent material properties and loaded under uniaxial compression corresponding to 1.9% apparent strain. Ultimate failure load, stiffness, and strain distributions were compared between metastatic and control vertebrae. Predicted failure load ranged from 0.2 kN to 6.2 kN (mean. {+/-} standard deviation: 1.8 {+/-} 1.6 kN metastatic; 1.7 {+/-} 1.5 kN control), with no statistically significant difference between groups (p > 0.05). Normalised failure load varied widely, reflecting lesion-specific mechanical heterogeneity. Lytic lesions generally weakened vertebrae, whereas mixed and blastic lesions occasionally enhanced strength, likely due to localised sclerosis or reactive bone formation. High compressive axial strains (greater than 0.019) were frequently concentrated near the endplates, particularly in lytic vertebrae. qCT-derived bone mineral density strongly correlated with failure load (R{superscript 2} = 0.74-0.77). These findings highlight the complexity of metastatic vertebral mechanics and demonstrate that qCT-based SSFE modelling provides a quantitative framework for assessing fracture risk, complementing conventional imaging-based tools.

Matching journals

The top 5 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
Bone
22 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
14.0%
2
Journal of Biomechanical Engineering
17 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
9.9%
3
Biomechanics and Modeling in Mechanobiology
25 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
9.9%
4
Frontiers in Bioengineering and Biotechnology
88 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
9.9%
5
Journal of the Mechanical Behavior of Biomedical Materials
22 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
9.9%
50% of probability mass above
6
Scientific Reports
3102 papers in training set
Top 15%
6.7%
7
Journal of Biomechanics
57 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
6.2%
8
PLOS ONE
4510 papers in training set
Top 32%
4.7%
9
JBMR Plus
16 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
3.5%
10
Annals of Biomedical Engineering
34 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
3.5%
11
Frontiers in Physiology
93 papers in training set
Top 2%
2.0%
12
Journal of Orthopaedic Research
19 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
1.7%
13
Journal of The Royal Society Interface
189 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.7%
14
Osteoarthritis and Cartilage
30 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
1.2%
15
Journal of Bone and Mineral Research
32 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
1.2%
16
Royal Society Open Science
193 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.2%
17
Acta Biomaterialia
85 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
0.9%
18
PeerJ
261 papers in training set
Top 14%
0.8%
19
PLOS Computational Biology
1633 papers in training set
Top 24%
0.8%
20
International Journal for Numerical Methods in Biomedical Engineering
12 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
0.7%
21
Computer Methods and Programs in Biomedicine
27 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.7%
22
European Radiology
14 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
0.7%
23
Ultrasound in Medicine & Biology
10 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
0.6%