Literature DB >> 27998170

Accuracy of femur reconstruction from sparse geometric data using a statistical shape model.

Ju Zhang1, Thor F Besier1,2.   

Abstract

Sparse geometric information from limited field-of-view medical images is often used to reconstruct the femur in biomechanical models of the hip and knee. However, the full femur geometry is needed to establish boundary conditions such as muscle attachment sites and joint axes which define the orientation of joint loads. Statistical shape models have been used to estimate the geometry of the full femur from varying amounts of sparse geometric information. However, the effect that different amounts of sparse data have on reconstruction accuracy has not been systematically assessed. In this study, we compared shape model and linear scaling reconstruction of the full femur surface from varying proportions of proximal and distal partial femur geometry in combination with morphometric and landmark data. We quantified reconstruction error in terms of surface-to-surface error as well as deviations in the reconstructed femur's anatomical coordinate system which is important for biomechanical models. Using a partial proximal femur surface, mean shape model-based reconstruction surface error was 1.8 mm with 0.15° or less anatomic axis error, compared to 19.1 mm and 2.7-5.6° for linear scaling. Similar results were found when using a partial distal surface. However, varying amounts of proximal or distal partial surface data had a negligible effect on reconstruction accuracy. Our results show that given an appropriate set of sparse geometric data, a shape model can reconstruct full femur geometry with far greater accuracy than simple scaling.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Femur; modelling; musculoskeletal modelling; statistical shape modelling

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27998170     DOI: 10.1080/10255842.2016.1263301

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Comput Methods Biomech Biomed Engin        ISSN: 1025-5842            Impact factor:   1.763


  8 in total

1.  Why are Antagonist Muscles Co-activated in My Simulation? A Musculoskeletal Model for Analysing Human Locomotor Tasks.

Authors:  Adrian K M Lai; Allison S Arnold; James M Wakeling
Journal:  Ann Biomed Eng       Date:  2017-09-12       Impact factor: 3.934

Review 2.  Bioinspired Technologies to Connect Musculoskeletal Mechanobiology to the Person for Training and Rehabilitation.

Authors:  Claudio Pizzolato; David G Lloyd; Rod S Barrett; Jill L Cook; Ming H Zheng; Thor F Besier; David J Saxby
Journal:  Front Comput Neurosci       Date:  2017-10-18       Impact factor: 2.380

3.  Minimal medical imaging can accurately reconstruct geometric bone models for musculoskeletal models.

Authors:  Edin K Suwarganda; Laura E Diamond; David G Lloyd; Thor F Besier; Ju Zhang; Bryce A Killen; Trevor N Savage; David J Saxby
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2019-02-11       Impact factor: 3.240

4.  Predicting Knee Joint Instability Using a Tibio-Femoral Statistical Shape Model.

Authors:  Pietro Cerveri; Antonella Belfatto; Alfonso Manzotti
Journal:  Front Bioeng Biotechnol       Date:  2020-04-17

5.  Is subject-specific musculoskeletal modelling worth the extra effort or is generic modelling worth the shortcut?

Authors:  Riad Akhundov; David J Saxby; Laura E Diamond; Suzi Edwards; Phil Clausen; Katherine Dooley; Sarah Blyton; Suzanne J Snodgrass
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2022-01-25       Impact factor: 3.240

6.  Morphological variation in paediatric lower limb bones.

Authors:  Laura Carman; Thor F Besier; Julie Choisne
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2022-02-28       Impact factor: 4.379

7.  Cartilage thickness and bone shape variations as a function of sex, height, body mass, and age in young adult knees.

Authors:  Marco Tien-Yueh Schneider; Nynke Rooks; Thor Besier
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2022-07-09       Impact factor: 4.996

8.  Development and validation of statistical shape models of the primary functional bone segments of the foot.

Authors:  Tamara M Grant; Laura E Diamond; Claudio Pizzolato; Bryce A Killen; Daniel Devaprakash; Luke Kelly; Jayishni N Maharaj; David J Saxby
Journal:  PeerJ       Date:  2020-02-04       Impact factor: 2.984

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.