Development and validation of a subject-specific moving-axis tibiofemoral joint model using MRI and EOS imaging during a quasi-static lunge.
basic_science · Level V
Where this comes from
- Record sourced from PubMed, PMID 29567307.
- Also identified by DOI 10.1016/j.jbiomech.2018.02.032.
- No licence information is recorded for this record.
- Because redistribution is not established, this page shows the abstract only. Follow the links below for the full text.
Abstract
The aims of this study were to introduce and validate a novel computationally-efficient subject-specific tibiofemoral joint model. Subjects performed a quasi-static lunge while micro-dose radiation bi-planar X-rays (EOS Imaging, Paris, France) were captured at roughly 0°, 20°, 45°, 60°, and 90° of tibiofemoral flexion. Joint translations and rotations were extracted from this experimental data through 2D-to-3D bone reconstructions, using an iterative closest point optimization technique, and employed during model calibration and validation. Subject-specific moving-axis and hinge models for comparisons were constructed in the AnyBody Modeling System (AMS) from Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI)-extracted anatomical surfaces and compared against the experimental data. The tibiofemoral axis of the hinge model was defined between the epicondyles while the moving-axis model was defined based on two tibiofemoral flexion angles (0° and 90°) and the articulation modeled such that the tibiofemoral joint axis moved linearly between these two positions as a function of the tibiofemoral flexion. Outside this range, the joint axis was assumed to remain stationary. Overall, the secondary joint kinematics (ML: medial-lateral, AP: anterior-posterior, SI: superior-inferior, IE: internal-external, AA: adduction-abduction) were better approximated by the moving-axis model with mean differences and standard errors of (ML: -1.98 ± 0.37 mm, AP: 6.50 ± 0.82 mm, SI: 0.05 ± 0.20 mm, IE: 0.59 ± 0.36°, AA: 1.90 ± 0.79°) and higher coefficients of determination (R<sup>2</sup>) for each clinical measure. While the hinge model achieved mean differences and standard errors of (ML: -0.84 ± 0.45 mm, AP: 10.11 ± 0.88 mm, SI: 0.66 ± 0.62 mm, IE: -3.17 ± 0.86°, AA: 11.60 ± 1.51°).
Medical subject headings
- Femur
- Knee Joint
- Movement
- Patient-Specific Modeling
- Tibia