INTRODUCTION: A novel computerized algorithm for hip joint motion simulation and collision detection, called the Equidistant Method, has been developed. This was compared to three pre-existing methods having different properties regarding definition of the hip joint center and behavior after collision detection. It was proposed that the Equidistant Method would be most accurate in detecting the location and extent of femoroacetabular impingement. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Five plastic pelves and ten plastic femora with modified acetabula and head-neck junctions, allowing for 50 different morphologic combinations, were examined, along with six cadaver hips. First, motions along anatomically relevant paths were performed. These motions were tracked by a navigation system and impingement locations were digitized with a pointer. Subsequently, previously generated 3D models of all the specimens, together with the recorded anatomic motion paths, were applied to all four simulation algorithms implemented in a diagnostic computer application. Collisions were detected within the motion paths, and the linear and angular differences regarding the location as well as the size of the detected impingement areas were compared and analyzed. RESULTS: The Equidistant Method detected impingement with significantly higher linear and angular accuracy compared to the other methods (p < 0.05). The size of the detected impingement area was smaller than that detected with the other methods, but this difference was not statistically significant. CONCLUSIONS: The increased accuracy of the Equidistant Method is achieved by implementing a dynamic hip joint center, more closely resembling the natural characteristics of the hip joint. Clinical application of this algorithm might serve as a diagnostic adjunct and support in the planning of joint-preserving surgery in patients with femoroacetabular impingement.
INTRODUCTION: A novel computerized algorithm for hip joint motion simulation and collision detection, called the Equidistant Method, has been developed. This was compared to three pre-existing methods having different properties regarding definition of the hip joint center and behavior after collision detection. It was proposed that the Equidistant Method would be most accurate in detecting the location and extent of femoroacetabular impingement. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Five plastic pelves and ten plastic femora with modified acetabula and head-neck junctions, allowing for 50 different morphologic combinations, were examined, along with six cadaver hips. First, motions along anatomically relevant paths were performed. These motions were tracked by a navigation system and impingement locations were digitized with a pointer. Subsequently, previously generated 3D models of all the specimens, together with the recorded anatomic motion paths, were applied to all four simulation algorithms implemented in a diagnostic computer application. Collisions were detected within the motion paths, and the linear and angular differences regarding the location as well as the size of the detected impingement areas were compared and analyzed. RESULTS: The Equidistant Method detected impingement with significantly higher linear and angular accuracy compared to the other methods (p < 0.05). The size of the detected impingement area was smaller than that detected with the other methods, but this difference was not statistically significant. CONCLUSIONS: The increased accuracy of the Equidistant Method is achieved by implementing a dynamic hip joint center, more closely resembling the natural characteristics of the hip joint. Clinical application of this algorithm might serve as a diagnostic adjunct and support in the planning of joint-preserving surgery in patients with femoroacetabular impingement.
Authors: Florian Schmaranzer; Till D Lerch; Klaus A Siebenrock; Moritz Tannast; Simon D Steppacher Journal: Clin Orthop Relat Res Date: 2019-05 Impact factor: 4.176
Authors: Simon D Steppacher; Corinne A Zurmühle; Marc Puls; Klaus A Siebenrock; Michael B Millis; Young-Jo Kim; Moritz Tannast Journal: Clin Orthop Relat Res Date: 2015-04 Impact factor: 4.176
Authors: Heinse W Bouma; Tom Hogervorst; Emmanuel Audenaert; Peter Krekel; Paulien M van Kampen Journal: Clin Orthop Relat Res Date: 2015-04 Impact factor: 4.176
Authors: Corinne A Zurmühle; Marco Milella; Simon D Steppacher; Markus S Hanke; Christoph E Albers; Moritz Tannast Journal: Clin Orthop Relat Res Date: 2017-02-13 Impact factor: 4.176
Authors: Moritz Tannast; Markus Hanke; Timo M Ecker; Stephen B Murphy; Christoph E Albers; Marc Puls Journal: Clin Orthop Relat Res Date: 2012-09 Impact factor: 4.176
Authors: Klaus A Siebenrock; Simon Damian Steppacher; Pascal Cyrill Haefeli; Joseph Michael Schwab; Moritz Tannast Journal: Clin Orthop Relat Res Date: 2013-12 Impact factor: 4.176
Authors: Till D Lerch; Sébastien Zwingelstein; Florian Schmaranzer; Adam Boschung; Markus S Hanke; Inga A S Todorski; Simon D Steppacher; Nicolas Gerber; Guodong Zeng; Klaus A Siebenrock; Moritz Tannast Journal: Orthop J Sports Med Date: 2021-05-28
Authors: Maarten A Röling; Monique I Visser; Edwin H G Oei; Peter Pilot; Gert-Jan Kleinrensink; Rolf M Bloem Journal: BMC Musculoskelet Disord Date: 2015-03-11 Impact factor: 2.362