| Literature DB >> 27769514 |
Arin M Ellingson1, Joseph D Mozingo2, Dixon J Magnuson3, Mark W Pagnano4, Kristin D Zhao5.
Abstract
Fluoroscopic imaging has become increasingly popular to investigate total knee arthroplasty kinematics non-invasively - 3D implant models are aligned with 2D image projections, and optimized via an edge-contour alignment technique. Previous studies have quantified the accuracy of this approach, however they do not always adequately address the impact of image collection parameters. A particularly sensitive parameter is the pulse width, or exposure time per frame. At longer pulse widths, more motion is captured in a single frame; this can lead to image blur and subsequent degradation to image edge quality. Therefore, the comparative accuracy of relative joint kinematics as a function of pulse width and joint velocity needs to be defined. A limits of agreement approach was taken to define the mean differences between optoelectric kinematic measures (gold standard) and fluoroscopic methods at various pulse widths (1, 8 and 16ms) and knee velocities (50, 100 and 225°/s). The mean absolute differences between the optoelectric and fluoroscopic methods for 1ms pulse width were less than 1.5° and 0.9mm. Comparable rotational differences (1.3°) were observed for the 8ms pulse width but had larger translational differences (1.4mm). The 16ms pulse width yielded the greatest mean differences (2.0° and 1.6mm), which increased with knee flexion velocity. The importance of pulse width and velocity should not be overlooked for future studies - this parameter has proven to be a sensitive metric in the quantification of joint motion via fluoroscopy and must be identified and reported in future studies. Copyright ÂEntities:
Keywords: Accuracy; Agreement; Arthroplasty; Fluoroscopy; Joint kinematics; Knee; Knee replacement; Pulse width
Mesh:
Year: 2016 PMID: 27769514 PMCID: PMC5242255 DOI: 10.1016/j.jbiomech.2016.09.044
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Biomech ISSN: 0021-9290 Impact factor: 2.712