Literature DB >> 28639171

Subject-Specific Axes of Rotation Based on Talar Morphology Do Not Improve Predictions of Tibiotalar and Subtalar Joint Kinematics.

Jennifer A Nichols1, Koren E Roach1,2, Niccolo M Fiorentino1, Andrew E Anderson3,4,5,6.   

Abstract

Use of subject-specific axes of rotation may improve predictions generated by kinematic models, especially for joints with complex anatomy, such as the tibiotalar and subtalar joints of the ankle. The objective of this study was twofold. First, we compared the axes of rotation between generic and subject-specific ankle models for ten control subjects. Second, we quantified the accuracy of generic and subject-specific models for predicting tibiotalar and subtalar joint motion during level walking using inverse kinematics. Here, tibiotalar and subtalar joint kinematics measured in vivo by dual-fluoroscopy served as the reference standard. The generic model was based on a cadaver study, while the subject-specific models were derived from each subject's talus reconstructed from computed tomography images. The subject-specific and generic axes of rotation were significantly different. The average angle between the modeled axes was 12.9° ± 4.3° and 24.4° ± 5.9° at the tibiotalar and subtalar joints, respectively. However, predictions from both models did not agree well with dynamic dual-fluoroscopy data, where errors ranged from 1.0° to 8.9° and 0.6° to 7.6° for the generic and subject-specific models, respectively. Our results suggest that methods that rely on talar morphology to define subject-specific axes may be inadequate for accurately predicting tibiotalar and subtalar joint kinematics.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Ankle; Biomechanics; Dynamic imaging; Gait; Model; Motion analysis

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28639171      PMCID: PMC5709192          DOI: 10.1007/s10439-017-1874-9

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ann Biomed Eng        ISSN: 0090-6964            Impact factor:   3.934


  30 in total

1.  FEBio: finite elements for biomechanics.

Authors:  Steve A Maas; Benjamin J Ellis; Gerard A Ateshian; Jeffrey A Weiss
Journal:  J Biomech Eng       Date:  2012-01       Impact factor: 2.097

2.  Calculating the axes of rotation for the subtalar and talocrural joints using 3D bone reconstructions.

Authors:  W C H Parr; H J Chatterjee; C Soligo
Journal:  J Biomech       Date:  2012-01-28       Impact factor: 2.712

3.  A new method for estimating joint parameters from motion data.

Authors:  Michael H Schwartz; Adam Rozumalski
Journal:  J Biomech       Date:  2005-01       Impact factor: 2.712

4.  Validation of a new model-based tracking technique for measuring three-dimensional, in vivo glenohumeral joint kinematics.

Authors:  Michael J Bey; Roger Zauel; Stephanie K Brock; Scott Tashman
Journal:  J Biomech Eng       Date:  2006-08       Impact factor: 2.097

5.  Reporting of noninferiority and equivalence randomized trials: an extension of the CONSORT statement.

Authors:  Gilda Piaggio; Diana R Elbourne; Douglas G Altman; Stuart J Pocock; Stephen J W Evans
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2006-03-08       Impact factor: 56.272

6.  A comparison of multi-segment foot kinematics during level overground and treadmill walking.

Authors:  Kirsten Tulchin; Michael Orendurff; Lori Karol
Journal:  Gait Posture       Date:  2009-10-24       Impact factor: 2.840

7.  In Vivo Kinematics of the Tibiotalar and Subtalar Joints in Asymptomatic Subjects: A High-Speed Dual Fluoroscopy Study.

Authors:  Koren E Roach; Bibo Wang; Ashley L Kapron; Niccolo M Fiorentino; Charles L Saltzman; K Bo Foreman; Andrew E Anderson
Journal:  J Biomech Eng       Date:  2016-09-01       Impact factor: 2.097

8.  Three-dimensional analysis of talar trochlea morphology: Implications for subject-specific kinematics of the talocrural joint.

Authors:  Shuhei Nozaki; Kota Watanabe; Masaki Katayose
Journal:  Clin Anat       Date:  2016-10-01       Impact factor: 2.414

9.  Bone shape difference between control and osteochondral defect groups of the ankle joint.

Authors:  N Tümer; L Blankevoort; M van de Giessen; M P Terra; P A de Jong; H Weinans; G J M Tuijthof; A A Zadpoor
Journal:  Osteoarthritis Cartilage       Date:  2016-08-03       Impact factor: 6.576

10.  The three-dimensional kinematics and flexibility characteristics of the human ankle and subtalar joints--Part I: Kinematics.

Authors:  S Siegler; J Chen; C D Schneck
Journal:  J Biomech Eng       Date:  1988-11       Impact factor: 2.097

View more
  5 in total

1.  Shape Approximation and Size Difference of the Upper Part of the Talus: Implication for Implant Design of the Talar Component for Total Ankle Replacement.

Authors:  Jian Yu; Dahang Zhao; Shuo Wang; Chao Zhang; Jiazhang Huang; Xu Wang; Xin Ma
Journal:  Biomed Res Int       Date:  2022-01-12       Impact factor: 3.411

2.  New anatomical reference systems for the bones of the foot and ankle complex: definitions and exploitation on clinical conditions.

Authors:  Michele Conconi; Alessandro Pompili; Nicola Sancisi; Alberto Leardini; Stefano Durante; Claudio Belvedere
Journal:  J Foot Ankle Res       Date:  2021-12-20       Impact factor: 2.303

3.  Validity and Reliability of a Novel Instrument for the Measurement of Subtalar Joint Axis of Rotation.

Authors:  Byong Hun Kim; Sae Yong Lee
Journal:  Int J Environ Res Public Health       Date:  2021-05-20       Impact factor: 3.390

4.  In Vivo Quantification of Hip Arthrokinematics during Dynamic Weight-bearing Activities using Dual Fluoroscopy.

Authors:  Penny R Atkins; Niccolo M Fiorentino; Andrew E Anderson
Journal:  J Vis Exp       Date:  2021-07-02       Impact factor: 1.424

5.  Centre of Rotation of the Human Subtalar Joint Using Weight-Bearing Clinical Computed Tomography.

Authors:  Marta Peña Fernández; Dorela Hoxha; Oliver Chan; Simon Mordecai; Gordon W Blunn; Gianluca Tozzi; Andy Goldberg
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2020-01-23       Impact factor: 4.379

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.