Literature DB >> 29411900

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

Azhar A Ali1, Erin M Mannen1, Paul J Rullkoetter1, Kevin B Shelburne1.   

Abstract

Successful outcome following total knee arthroplasty (TKA) with patella resurfacing is partly determined by the restoration of patellofemoral (PF) function and recovery of the quadriceps mechanism. The current study compared two patellar TKA geometries (medialized dome and anatomic) to determine their impact on PF mechanics and quadriceps function. In-vivo, subject-specific patellar mechanics were evaluated using a sequential experimental and modeling approach. First, stereo radiography, marker-based motion capture, and force plate data were collected for TKA patients (10 dome, 10 anatomic) performing a knee extension and lunge. Second, subject-specific, whole-body, musculoskeletal models, including 6 degrees-of-freedom (DOF) knee joint kinematics, were created for each subject and activity to predict quadriceps forces. Last, finite element models of each subject and activity were created to predict PF kinematics, patellar loading, moment arm, and patellar tendon angle. Differences in mechanics between dome and anatomic patients were highlighted during load-bearing (lunge) activity. Anatomic subjects demonstrated greater PF flexion angles (avg. 11 ± 3°) compared to dome subjects during lunge. Similar to the natural knee, contact locations on the patella migrated inferior to superior as the knee flexed in anatomic subjects, but remained relatively superior in dome subjects. Differences in kinematics and contact location likely contributed to altered mechanics with anatomic subjects presenting greater load transfer from the quadriceps to the patellar tendon in deep flexion (>75°), and dome subjects demonstrating larger contact forces during lunge. Although there was substantial patient variability, evaluations of PF mechanics suggested improved quadriceps function and more natural kinematics in the anatomic design.
© 2018 Orthopaedic Research Society. Published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Orthop Res 36:1910-1918, 2018. © 2018 Orthopaedic Research Society. Published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Entities:  

Keywords:  finite element; musculoskeletal; patella; total knee arthroplasty

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 29411900      PMCID: PMC6081258          DOI: 10.1002/jor.23865

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


  47 in total

1.  The role of patient, surgical, and implant design variation in total knee replacement performance.

Authors:  Clare K Fitzpatrick; Chadd W Clary; Paul J Rullkoetter
Journal:  J Biomech       Date:  2012-06-20       Impact factor: 2.712

2.  Comparison of patellar bone strain in the natural and implanted knee during simulated deep flexion.

Authors:  Clare K Fitzpatrick; Mark A Baldwin; Azhar A Ali; Peter J Laz; Paul J Rullkoetter
Journal:  J Orthop Res       Date:  2010-09-09       Impact factor: 3.494

3.  The Visible Human Project.

Authors:  M J Ackerman
Journal:  J Biocommun       Date:  1991

4.  Prevalence of primary and revision total hip and knee arthroplasty in the United States from 1990 through 2002.

Authors:  Steven Kurtz; Fionna Mowat; Kevin Ong; Nathan Chan; Edmund Lau; Michael Halpern
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am       Date:  2005-07       Impact factor: 5.284

5.  A planar model of the knee joint to characterize the knee extensor mechanism.

Authors:  G T Yamaguchi; F E Zajac
Journal:  J Biomech       Date:  1989       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.  Early quadriceps strength loss after total knee arthroplasty. The contributions of muscle atrophy and failure of voluntary muscle activation.

Authors:  Ryan L Mizner; Stephanie C Petterson; Jennifer E Stevens; Krista Vandenborne; Lynn Snyder-Mackler
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am       Date:  2005-05       Impact factor: 5.284

Review 8.  Diagnosis and treatment of patients with patellofemoral pain.

Authors:  John P Fulkerson
Journal:  Am J Sports Med       Date:  2002 May-Jun       Impact factor: 6.202

9.  Validation of predicted patellofemoral mechanics in a finite element model of the healthy and cruciate-deficient knee.

Authors:  Azhar A Ali; Sami S Shalhoub; Adam J Cyr; Clare K Fitzpatrick; Lorin P Maletsky; Paul J Rullkoetter; Kevin B Shelburne
Journal:  J Biomech       Date:  2015-12-21       Impact factor: 2.712

10.  In vivo assessment of patellofemoral joint contact area in individuals who are pain free.

Authors:  Gretchen B Salsich; Samuel R Ward; Michael R Terk; Christopher M Powers
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2003-12       Impact factor: 4.176

View more
  3 in total

1.  Tibial sagittal and rotational alignment reduce patellofemoral stresses in posterior stabilized total knee arthroplasty.

Authors:  Hideki Mizu-Uchi; Yuan Ma; Shojiro Ishibashi; Clifford W Colwell; Yasuharu Nakashima; Darryl D D'Lima
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2022-07-19       Impact factor: 4.996

2.  The Design of the Patellar Component Does Not Affect the Patient-Reported Outcome Measures in Primary Posterior-Stabilized Total Knee Arthroplasty: A Randomized Prospective Study.

Authors:  Oog-Jin Shon; Gi Beom Kim
Journal:  J Clin Med       Date:  2022-03-02       Impact factor: 4.241

3.  The Influence of Mathematical Definitions on Patellar Kinematics Representations.

Authors:  Adrian Sauer; Maeruan Kebbach; Allan Maas; William M Mihalko; Thomas M Grupp
Journal:  Materials (Basel)       Date:  2021-12-11       Impact factor: 3.623

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.