Literature DB >> 26792665

Subject-specific modeling of muscle force and knee contact in total knee arthroplasty.

Alessandro Navacchia1, Paul J Rullkoetter1, Pascal Schütz2, Renate B List2, Clare K Fitzpatrick1, Kevin B Shelburne1.   

Abstract

Understanding the mechanical loading environment and resulting joint mechanics for activities of daily living in total knee arthroplasty is essential to continuous improvement in implant design. Although survivorship of these devices is good, a substantial number of patients report dissatisfaction with the outcome of their procedure. Knowledge of in vivo kinematics and joint loading will enable improvement in preclinical assessment and refinement of implant geometry. The purpose of this investigation was to describe the mechanics of total knee arthroplasty during a variety of activities of daily living (gait, walking down stairs, and chair rise/sit). Estimates of muscle forces, tibial contact load, location, and pressure distribution was performed through a combination of mobile fluoroscopy data collection, musculoskeletal modeling, and finite element simulation. For the activities evaluated, joint compressive load was greatest during walking down stairs; however, the highest contact pressure occurred during chair rise/sit. The joint contact moment in the frontal plane was mainly varus for gait and walking down stairs, while it was valgus during chair rise/sit. Excursion of the center of pressure on the tibial component was similar during each activity and between the medial and lateral sides. The main determinants of center of pressure location were internal-external rotation, joint load, and tibial insert conformity.
© 2016 Orthopaedic Research Society. Published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Orthop Res 34:1576-1587, 2016. © 2016 Orthopaedic Research Society. Published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Entities:  

Keywords:  TKR; fluoroscopy; knee osteoarthritis; musculoskeletal modeling

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 26792665      PMCID: PMC5502084          DOI: 10.1002/jor.23171

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Orthop Res        ISSN: 0736-0266            Impact factor:   3.494


  49 in total

1.  Prediction of In Vivo Knee Joint Loads Using a Global Probabilistic Analysis.

Authors:  Alessandro Navacchia; Casey A Myers; Paul J Rullkoetter; Kevin B Shelburne
Journal:  J Biomech Eng       Date:  2016-03       Impact factor: 2.097

2.  The effect of sagittal laxity on function after posterior cruciate-retaining total knee replacement.

Authors:  David P Gwynne Jones; Conlin Locke; Jonathon Pennington; Jean-Claude Theis
Journal:  J Arthroplasty       Date:  2006-08       Impact factor: 4.757

3.  In vivo medial and lateral tibial loads during dynamic and high flexion activities.

Authors:  Dong Zhao; Scott A Banks; Darryl D D'Lima; Clifford W Colwell; Benjamin J Fregly
Journal:  J Orthop Res       Date:  2007-05       Impact factor: 3.494

4.  International survey of primary and revision total knee replacement.

Authors:  Steven M Kurtz; Kevin L Ong; Edmund Lau; Marcel Widmer; Milka Maravic; Enrique Gómez-Barrena; Maria de Fátima de Pina; Valerio Manno; Marina Torre; William L Walter; Richard de Steiger; Rudolph G T Geesink; Mikko Peltola; Christoph Röder
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2011-03-15       Impact factor: 3.075

5.  The influence of total knee arthroplasty geometry on mid-flexion stability: an experimental and finite element study.

Authors:  Chadd W Clary; Clare K Fitzpatrick; Lorin P Maletsky; Paul J Rullkoetter
Journal:  J Biomech       Date:  2013-03-15       Impact factor: 2.712

6.  A joint coordinate system for the clinical description of three-dimensional motions: application to the knee.

Authors:  E S Grood; W J Suntay
Journal:  J Biomech Eng       Date:  1983-05       Impact factor: 2.097

7.  Total knee arthroplasty volume, utilization, and outcomes among Medicare beneficiaries, 1991-2010.

Authors:  Peter Cram; Xin Lu; Stephen L Kates; Jasvinder A Singh; Yue Li; Brian R Wolf
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2012-09-26       Impact factor: 56.272

8.  In vivo contact kinematics and contact forces of the knee after total knee arthroplasty during dynamic weight-bearing activities.

Authors:  Kartik M Varadarajan; Angela L Moynihan; Darryl D'Lima; Clifford W Colwell; Guoan Li
Journal:  J Biomech       Date:  2008-06-05       Impact factor: 2.712

9.  Tibio-femoral loading during human gait and stair climbing.

Authors:  William R Taylor; Markus O Heller; Georg Bergmann; Georg N Duda
Journal:  J Orthop Res       Date:  2004-05       Impact factor: 3.494

10.  Standardized loads acting in knee implants.

Authors:  Georg Bergmann; Alwina Bender; Friedmar Graichen; Jörn Dymke; Antonius Rohlmann; Adam Trepczynski; Markus O Heller; Ines Kutzner
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2014-01-23       Impact factor: 3.240

View more
  9 in total

1.  Simulated hip abductor strengthening reduces peak joint contact forces in patients with total hip arthroplasty.

Authors:  Casey A Myers; Peter J Laz; Kevin B Shelburne; Dana L Judd; Joshua D Winters; Jennifer E Stevens-Lapsley; Bradley S Davidson
Journal:  J Biomech       Date:  2019-06-06       Impact factor: 2.712

2.  The interaction of muscle moment arm, knee laxity, and torque in a multi-scale musculoskeletal model of the lower limb.

Authors:  Donald R Hume; Alessandro Navacchia; Azhar A Ali; Kevin B Shelburne
Journal:  J Biomech       Date:  2018-06-15       Impact factor: 2.712

3.  A computationally efficient strategy to estimate muscle forces in a finite element musculoskeletal model of the lower limb.

Authors:  Alessandro Navacchia; Donald R Hume; Paul J Rullkoetter; Kevin B Shelburne
Journal:  J Biomech       Date:  2018-12-28       Impact factor: 2.712

4.  Comparison of Marker-Based and Stereo Radiography Knee Kinematics in Activities of Daily Living.

Authors:  Donald R Hume; Vasiliki Kefala; Michael D Harris; Kevin B Shelburne
Journal:  Ann Biomed Eng       Date:  2018-06-14       Impact factor: 3.934

5.  The impact of hip implant alignment on muscle and joint loading during dynamic activities.

Authors:  Casey A Myers; Peter J Laz; Kevin B Shelburne; Dana L Judd; Daniel N Huff; Joshua D Winters; Jennifer E Stevens-Lapsley; Paul J Rullkoetter
Journal:  Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon)       Date:  2018-02-14       Impact factor: 2.063

6.  In vivo comparison of medialized dome and anatomic patellofemoral geometries using subject-specific computational modeling.

Authors:  Azhar A Ali; Erin M Mannen; Paul J Rullkoetter; Kevin B Shelburne
Journal:  J Orthop Res       Date:  2018-03-06       Impact factor: 3.494

7.  Total Knee Replacement: Subject-Specific Modeling, Finite Element Analysis, and Evaluation of Dynamic Activities.

Authors:  Iliana Loi; Dimitar Stanev; Konstantinos Moustakas
Journal:  Front Bioeng Biotechnol       Date:  2021-04-16

8.  Kinematics and kinetics comparison of ultra-congruent versus medial-pivot designs for total knee arthroplasty by multibody analysis.

Authors:  Giovanni Putame; Mara Terzini; Fabrizio Rivera; Maeruan Kebbach; Rainer Bader; Cristina Bignardi
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2022-02-23       Impact factor: 4.379

9.  Comparison of Kinematics and Contact Mechanics in Normal Knee and Total Knee Replacements: A Computational Investigation.

Authors:  Liming Shu; Takashi Sato; Xijin Hua; Naohiko Sugita
Journal:  Ann Biomed Eng       Date:  2021-06-17       Impact factor: 3.934

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.