Literature DB >> 30213649

Articular-surface-based automatic anatomical coordinate systems for the knee bones.

Jean-Baptiste Renault1, Gaëtan Aüllo-Rasser2, Mathias Donnez3, Sébastien Parratte4, Patrick Chabrand4.   

Abstract

Increasing use of patient-specific surgical procedures in orthopaedics means that patient-specific anatomical coordinate systems (ACSs) need to be determined. For knee bones, automatic algorithms constructing ACSs exist and are assumed to be more reliable than manual methods, although both approaches are based on non-unique numerical reconstructions of true bone geometries. Furthermore, determining the best algorithms is difficult, as algorithms are evaluated on different datasets. Thus, in this study, we developed 3 algorithms, each with 3 variants, and compared them with 5 from the literature on a dataset comprising 24 lower-limb CT-scans. To evaluate algorithms' sensitivity to the operator-dependent reconstruction procedure, the tibia, patella and femur of each CT-scan were each reconstructed once by three different operators. Our algorithms use principal inertia axis (PIA), cross-sectional area, surface normal orientations and curvature data to identify the bone region underneath articular surfaces (ASs). Then geometric primitives are fitted to ASs, and the ACSs are constructed from the geometric primitive points and/or axes. For each bone type, the algorithm displaying the least inter-operator variability is identified. The best femur algorithm fits a cylinder to posterior condyle ASs and a sphere to the femoral head, average axis deviations: 0.12°, position differences: 0.20 mm. The best patella algorithm identifies the AS PIAs, average axis deviations: 0.91°, position differences: 0.19 mm. The best tibia algorithm finds the ankle AS center and the 1st PIA of a layer around a plane fitted to condyle ASs, average axis deviations: 0.38°, position differences: 0.27 mm.
Copyright © 2018 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  3D bone model; 3D imaging; Anatomical coordinate system; Kinematics; Surgery planning

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 30213649     DOI: 10.1016/j.jbiomech.2018.08.028

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Biomech        ISSN: 0021-9290            Impact factor:   2.712


  5 in total

1.  Tibiofemoral helical axis of motion during the full gait cycle measured using biplane radiography.

Authors:  Tom Gale; William Anderst
Journal:  Med Eng Phys       Date:  2020-10-28       Impact factor: 2.242

2.  Articulation of the femoral condyle during knee flexion.

Authors:  Guoan Li; Chaochao Zhou; Zhenming Zhang; Timothy Foster; Hany Bedair
Journal:  J Biomech       Date:  2021-12-11       Impact factor: 2.712

3.  Physiological articular contact kinematics and morphological femoral condyle translations of the tibiofemoral joint.

Authors:  Chaochao Zhou; Zhenming Zhang; Zhitao Rao; Timothy Foster; Hany Bedair; Guoan Li
Journal:  J Biomech       Date:  2021-05-15       Impact factor: 2.789

4.  The Oval-like Cross-section of Femoral Neck Isthmus in Three-dimensional Morphological Analysis.

Authors:  Ru-Yi Zhang; Yan-Peng Zhao; Xiu-Yun Su; Jian-Tao Li; Jing-Xin Zhao; Li-Cheng Zhang; Pei-Fu Tang
Journal:  Orthop Surg       Date:  2021-01-08       Impact factor: 2.071

5.  A proposed standard for quantifying 3-D hindlimb joint poses in living and extinct archosaurs.

Authors:  Stephen M Gatesy; Armita R Manafzadeh; Peter J Bishop; Morgan L Turner; Robert E Kambic; Andrew R Cuff; John R Hutchinson
Journal:  J Anat       Date:  2022-02-03       Impact factor: 2.921

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.