| Literature DB >> 24467794 |
Kai Yu Zhang, Angela E Kedgley, Claire R Donoghue, Daniel Rueckert, Anthony M J Bull.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: The meniscus has an important role in force transmission across the knee, but a detailed three-dimensional (3D) morphometric shape analysis of the lateral meniscus to elucidate subject-specific function has not been conducted. The aim of this study was to perform 3D morphometric analyses of the lateral meniscus in order to correlate shape variables with anthropometric parameters, thereby gaining a better understanding of the relationship between lateral meniscus shape and its load-bearing function.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2014 PMID: 24467794 PMCID: PMC3978753 DOI: 10.1186/ar4455
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Arthritis Res Ther ISSN: 1478-6354 Impact factor: 5.156
Figure 1Segmentation of the magnetic resonance MR images. (A) Coronal plane; (B) sagittal plane; (C) transverse plane; (D) three-dimensional surface model.
Figure 2Seven morphological parameters quantified. Posterior horn width (PH_Wid): the distance measured between the most posterior and anterior aspects of the posterior horn; anterior horn width (AH_Wid): the distance measured between the most posterior and anterior aspects of the anterior horn; posterior horn length (PH_ Len): the distance measured between the most lateral aspect of the lateral horn and the most medial aspect of the posterior horn; anterior horn length (AH_ Len): the distance measured between the most lateral aspect of the lateral horn and the most medial aspect of the anterior horn; posterior horn to anterior horn distance (PA_Dis): the distance measured between the coronal planes through the middle of the medial aspect of the anterior and posterior horns; lateral peripheral horn thickness (LPH_Thic): the distance measured between the most lateral aspects on the superior and inferior surfaces of the lateral horn; lateral peripheral horn width (LPH_Wid): the distance measured between the most lateral and medial aspects of the lateral horn.
Figure 3The area covered by the meniscus (Cov_Area) and the gap area between the horns (Gap_Area).
Results of correlation tests between anthropometric factors
| | <0.001* (0.725) | 0.589 (0.079) | <0.001* (0.795) | |
| | 0.560, 0.835 | --------------- | 0.663, 0.879 | |
| | | <0.001* (0.740) | <0.001* (0.764) | |
| | | 0.581, 0.844 | 0.617, 0.860 | |
| | | | 0.019 (0.331) | |
| --------------- |
*Statistically significant.
Change rates of quantitative measurements
| | |||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1st PMV | 54.2 | -13.1 | 3.4 | 5.7 | 15.5 | 42.0 | 35.1 | 10.2 | 16.3 | -22.2 | 56.7 | 50.9 | Size |
| 2nd PMV | 38.3 | 9.1 | 28.0 | 32.3 | -9.2 | 22.0 | 22.6 | 4.8 | 3.9 | -12.3 | 35.9 | 37.6 | Horn Lengths |
| 3rd PMV | 18.7 | -14.5 | 25.8 | 36.6 | 33.6 | -11.4 | -14.4 | 12.6 | 1.4 | 51.7 | 17.7 | 18.7 | Horn openness |
| 4th PMV | 3.2 | -8.6 | -31.6 | 8.1 | -2.71 | 17.4 | -2.1 | 4.3 | 7.4 | 9.6 | 6.9 | -3.2 | Assemetry |
| 5th PMV | 31.2 | 12.6 | 36.9 | 41.0 | -10.5 | 6.5 | 4.7 | 61.9 | 47.2 | 15.4 | 8.1 | 31.2 | Horn widths |
| 6th PMV | 7.05 | 2.1 | 15.1 | 30.9 | 4.1 | -10.3 | -4.8 | 13.5 | 9.3 | 11.0 | 7.2 | 4.5 | Horn thickness |
Quantitative measurements include: posterior horn width (PH_Wid), anterior horn width (AH_Wid), posterior horn length (PH_ Len), anterior horn length (AH_ Len), posterior horn to anterior horn distance (PA_Dis), lateral peripheral horn thickness (LPH_Thic), lateral peripheral horn width (LPH_Wid), cover area (Cov_Area), and coverage percentage (Cov_Pct) on tibial plateau, ratio of the distance between horns to the horn length (RDL), contact area (Con_Area) with the femur, and total contact area (Tcon_Area), which sums the contact area with the femur and the area of exposed cartilage. The 1st and 3rd PMVs were found to correlate with height, weight, femoral condyle width, and body mass index.
Figure 4First six principal morphological variations. Mean model shown in pink.
Correlation test results between anthropometric factors and principal morphological variations
| | | | | | | | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| | | | |||||||
| <0.001* | 0.569 | 0.381, 0.750 | <0.001* | 0.897 | 0.777, 0.948 | 0.012* | 0.497 | 0.192, 0.714 | |
| <0.001* | 0.647 | 0.450, 0.784 | 0.046* | 0.360 | 0.026, 0.622 | 0114 | 0.321 | ------------- | |
| <0.001* | 0.622 | 0.416, 0.748 | 0.003* | 0.563 | 0.279, 0.756 | 0.040* | 0.414 | 0.089, 0.659 | |
| | 0.002* | 0.376 | 0.109, 0.592 | 0.039* | 0.415 | 0.091, 0.660 | 0.260 | 0.208 | ------------- |
| 0.003* | 0.406 | 0.144, 0.615 | 0.039* | 0.416 | 0.092, 0.660 | 0.012* | 0.546 | 0.256, 0.746 | |
| 0.025* | 0.312 | 0.083, 0.510 | 0.038* | 0.417 | 0.093, 0.661 | 0.056 | 0.490 | ------------- | |
| 0.019* | 0.531 | 0.236, 0.736 | 0.054 | 0.210 | ------------- | 0.046* | 0.331 | 0.070, 0.601 | |
| 0.647 | 0.006 | ------------- | 0.563 | 0.121 | ------------- | 0.889 | -0.030 | ------------- | |
*: statistically significant.
Figure 5Superior views of the sketches of the lateral meniscus. When the size of the subject increases and the tibial plateau becomes larger in size, the mean model (black lines) changes size uniformly (black dotted lines) and according to the first and third principal morphological variations of the statistical shape model (red lines).