Literature DB >> 25429519

A subject-specific musculoskeletal modeling framework to predict in vivo mechanics of total knee arthroplasty.

Marco A Marra, Valentine Vanheule, René Fluit, Bart H F J M Koopman, John Rasmussen, Nico Verdonschot, Michael S Andersen.   

Abstract

Musculoskeletal (MS) models should be able to integrate patient-specific MS architecture and undergo thorough validation prior to their introduction into clinical practice. We present a methodology to develop subject-specific models able to simultaneously predict muscle, ligament, and knee joint contact forces along with secondary knee kinematics. The MS architecture of a generic cadaver-based model was scaled using an advanced morphing technique to the subject-specific morphology of a patient implanted with an instrumented total knee arthroplasty (TKA) available in the fifth "grand challenge competition to predict in vivo knee loads" dataset. We implemented two separate knee models, one employing traditional hinge constraints, which was solved using an inverse dynamics technique, and another one using an 11-degree-of-freedom (DOF) representation of the tibiofemoral (TF) and patellofemoral (PF) joints, which was solved using a combined inverse dynamic and quasi-static analysis, called force-dependent kinematics (FDK). TF joint forces for one gait and one right-turn trial and secondary knee kinematics for one unloaded leg-swing trial were predicted and evaluated using experimental data available in the grand challenge dataset. Total compressive TF contact forces were predicted by both hinge and FDK knee models with a root-mean-square error (RMSE) and a coefficient of determination (R2) smaller than 0.3 body weight (BW) and equal to 0.9 in the gait trial simulation and smaller than 0.4 BW and larger than 0.8 in the right-turn trial simulation, respectively. Total, medial, and lateral TF joint contact force predictions were highly similar, regardless of the type of knee model used. Medial (respectively lateral) TF forces were over- (respectively, under-) predicted with a magnitude error of M < 0.2 (respectively > -0.4) in the gait trial, and under- (respectively, over-) predicted with a magnitude error of M > -0.4 (respectively < 0.3) in the right-turn trial. Secondary knee kinematics from the unloaded leg-swing trial were overall better approximated using the FDK model (average Sprague and Geers' combined error C = 0.06) than when using a hinged knee model (C = 0.34). The proposed modeling approach allows detailed subject-specific scaling and personalization and does not contain any nonphysiological parameters. This modeling framework has potential applications in aiding the clinical decision-making in orthopedics procedures and as a tool for virtual implant design.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 25429519     DOI: 10.1115/1.4029258

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Biomech Eng        ISSN: 0148-0731            Impact factor:   2.097


  35 in total

1.  Incorporating Six Degree-of-Freedom Intervertebral Joint Stiffness in a Lumbar Spine Musculoskeletal Model-Method and Performance in Flexed Postures.

Authors:  Xiangjie Meng; Alexander G Bruno; Bo Cheng; Wenjun Wang; Mary L Bouxsein; Dennis E Anderson
Journal:  J Biomech Eng       Date:  2015-10       Impact factor: 2.097

2.  The Influence of Component Alignment and Ligament Properties on Tibiofemoral Contact Forces in Total Knee Replacement.

Authors:  Colin R Smith; Michael F Vignos; Rachel L Lenhart; Jarred Kaiser; Darryl G Thelen
Journal:  J Biomech Eng       Date:  2016-02       Impact factor: 2.097

3.  Improving Musculoskeletal Model Scaling Using an Anatomical Atlas: The Importance of Gender and Anthropometric Similarity to Quantify Joint Reaction Forces.

Authors:  Ziyun Ding; Chui K Tsang; Daniel Nolte; Angela E Kedgley; Anthony M J Bull
Journal:  IEEE Trans Biomed Eng       Date:  2019-03-28       Impact factor: 4.538

4.  [Ligament-controlled positioning of the knee prosthesis components].

Authors:  K-H Widmer; A Zich
Journal:  Orthopade       Date:  2015-04       Impact factor: 1.087

5.  Perspectives on Sharing Models and Related Resources in Computational Biomechanics Research.

Authors:  Ahmet Erdemir; Peter J Hunter; Gerhard A Holzapfel; Leslie M Loew; John Middleton; Christopher R Jacobs; Perumal Nithiarasu; Rainlad Löhner; Guowei Wei; Beth A Winkelstein; Victor H Barocas; Farshid Guilak; Joy P Ku; Jennifer L Hicks; Scott L Delp; Michael Sacks; Jeffrey A Weiss; Gerard A Ateshian; Steve A Maas; Andrew D McCulloch; Grace C Y Peng
Journal:  J Biomech Eng       Date:  2018-02-01       Impact factor: 2.097

6.  Electromyography-Driven Forward Dynamics Simulation to Estimate In Vivo Joint Contact Forces During Normal, Smooth, and Bouncy Gaits.

Authors:  Swithin S Razu; Trent M Guess
Journal:  J Biomech Eng       Date:  2018-07-01       Impact factor: 2.097

7.  Real-time inverse kinematics and inverse dynamics for lower limb applications using OpenSim.

Authors:  C Pizzolato; M Reggiani; L Modenese; D G Lloyd
Journal:  Comput Methods Biomech Biomed Engin       Date:  2016-10-10       Impact factor: 1.763

8.  Estimation of attachment regions of hip muscles in CT image using muscle attachment probabilistic atlas constructed from measurements in eight cadavers.

Authors:  Norio Fukuda; Yoshito Otake; Masaki Takao; Futoshi Yokota; Takeshi Ogawa; Keisuke Uemura; Ryota Nakaya; Kazunori Tamura; Robert B Grupp; Amirhossein Farvardin; Mehran Armand; Nobuhiko Sugano; Yoshinobu Sato
Journal:  Int J Comput Assist Radiol Surg       Date:  2017-02-10       Impact factor: 2.924

9.  A computational framework for simultaneous estimation of muscle and joint contact forces and body motion using optimization and surrogate modeling.

Authors:  Ilan Eskinazi; Benjamin J Fregly
Journal:  Med Eng Phys       Date:  2018-03-02       Impact factor: 2.242

10.  ReadySim: A computational framework for building explicit finite element musculoskeletal simulations directly from motion laboratory data.

Authors:  Donald R Hume; Paul J Rullkoetter; Kevin B Shelburne
Journal:  Int J Numer Method Biomed Eng       Date:  2020-09-01       Impact factor: 2.747

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.