Literature DB >> 18635360

Precision assessment of model-based RSA for a total knee prosthesis in a biplanar set-up.

C Trozzi1, B L Kaptein, E H Garling, T Shelyakova, A Russo, L Bragonzoni, S Martelli.   

Abstract

Model-based Roentgen Stereophotogrammetric Analysis (RSA) was recently developed for the measurement of prosthesis micromotion. Its main advantage is that markers do not need to be attached to the implants as traditional marker-based RSA requires. Model-based RSA has only been tested in uniplanar radiographic set-ups. A biplanar set-up would theoretically facilitate the pose estimation algorithm, since radiographic projections would show more different shape features of the implants than in uniplanar images. We tested the precision of model-based RSA and compared it with that of the traditional marker-based method in a biplanar set-up. Micromotions of both tibial and femoral components were measured with both the techniques from double examinations of patients participating in a clinical study. The results showed that in the biplanar set-up model-based RSA presents a homogeneous distribution of precision for all the translation directions, but an inhomogeneous error for rotations, especially internal-external rotation presented higher errors than rotations about the transverse and sagittal axes. Model-based RSA was less precise than the marker-based method, although the differences were not significant for the translations and rotations of the tibial component, with the exception of the internal-external rotations. For both prosthesis components the precisions of model-based RSA were below 0.2 mm for all the translations, and below 0.3 degrees for rotations about transverse and sagittal axes. These values are still acceptable for clinical studies aimed at evaluating total knee prosthesis micromotion. In a biplanar set-up model-based RSA is a valid alternative to traditional marker-based RSA where marking of the prosthesis is an enormous disadvantage.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18635360     DOI: 10.1016/j.knee.2008.05.001

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Knee        ISSN: 0968-0160            Impact factor:   2.199


  7 in total

1.  How do CAD models compare with reverse engineered manufactured components for use in wear analysis?

Authors:  Matthew G Teeter; Douglas D R Naudie; Robert B Bourne; David W Holdsworth
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2012-07       Impact factor: 4.176

2.  Error performances of a model-based biplane fluoroscopic system for tracking knee prosthesis during treadmill gait task.

Authors:  Arnaud Barré; Kamiar Aminian
Journal:  Med Biol Eng Comput       Date:  2017-07-18       Impact factor: 2.602

3.  Implant migration and functional outcome of Reverse Shoulder Lateralized Glenosphere Line Extension System: a study protocol for a randomized controlled trial.

Authors:  Marie Louise Jensen; Bo S Olsen; Marc R K Nyring; Müjgan Yilmaz; Michael M Petersen; Gunnar Flivik; Jeppe V Rasmussen
Journal:  Trials       Date:  2022-07-19       Impact factor: 2.728

4.  Accuracy assessment of Tri-plane B-mode ultrasound for non-invasive 3D kinematic analysis of knee joints.

Authors:  Md Abdullah Masum; Mark Pickering; Andrew Lambert; Jennie Scarvell; Paul Smith
Journal:  Biomed Eng Online       Date:  2014-08-26       Impact factor: 2.819

5.  Combined and hybrid marker models for radiostereometry assessment of polyethylene liner motion in dual mobility hip prosthesis: a proof-of-concept study.

Authors:  Peter Bo Jørgensen; Bart L Kaptein; Kjeld Søballe; Stig S Jakobsen; Maiken Stilling
Journal:  Eur Radiol Exp       Date:  2021-12-15

6.  Does a new knee design perform as well as the design it replaces?

Authors:  M Molt; P Ljung; S Toksvig-Larsen
Journal:  Bone Joint Res       Date:  2012-12-01       Impact factor: 5.853

7.  Early migration of stemless and stemmed humeral components after total shoulder arthroplasty for osteoarthritis-study protocol for a randomized controlled trial.

Authors:  Marc Randall Kristensen Nyring; Bo S Olsen; Müjgan Yilmaz; Michael M Petersen; Gunnar Flivik; Jeppe V Rasmussen
Journal:  Trials       Date:  2020-10-07       Impact factor: 2.279

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.