Literature DB >> 33537727

Deciphering the "Art" in Modeling and Simulation of the Knee Joint: Variations in Model Development.

Nynke B Rooks1, Marco T Y Schneider1, Ahmet Erdemir2, Jason P Halloran3, Peter J Laz4, Kevin B Shelburne4, Donald R Hume4, Carl W Imhauser5, William Zaylor6, Shady Elmasry5, Ariel Schwartz2, Snehal K Chokhandre2, Neda Abdollahi Nohouji7, Thor F Besier8.   

Abstract

The use of computational modeling to investigate knee joint biomechanics has increased exponentially over the last few decades. Developing computational models is a creative process where decisions have to be made, subject to the modelers' knowledge and previous experiences, resulting in the "art" of modeling. The long-term goal of the KneeHub project is to understand the influence of subjective decisions on the final outcomes and the reproducibility of computational knee joint models. In this paper, we report on the model development phase of this project, investigating model development decisions and deviations from initial modeling plans. Five teams developed computational knee joint models from the same dataset, and we compared each teams' initial uncalibrated models and their model development workflows. Variations in the software tools and modeling approaches were found, resulting in differences such as the representation of the anatomical knee joint structures in the model. The teams consistently defined the boundary conditions and used the same anatomical coordinate system convention. However, deviations in the anatomical landmarks used to define the coordinate systems were present, resulting in a large spread in the kinematic outputs of the uncalibrated models. The reported differences and similarities in model development and simulation presented here illustrate the importance of the "art" of modeling and how subjective decision-making can lead to variation in model outputs. All teams deviated from their initial modeling plans, indicating that model development is a flexible process and difficult to plan in advance, even for experienced teams.
Copyright © 2021 by ASME.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2021        PMID: 33537727      PMCID: PMC8086182          DOI: 10.1115/1.4050028

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Biomech Eng        ISSN: 0148-0731            Impact factor:   1.899


  3 in total

1.  Open Knee(s): A Free and Open Source Library of Specimen-Specific Models and Related Digital Assets for Finite Element Analysis of the Knee Joint.

Authors:  Snehal Chokhandre; Ariel Schwartz; Ellen Klonowski; Benjamin Landis; Ahmet Erdemir
Journal:  Ann Biomed Eng       Date:  2022-09-14       Impact factor: 4.219

2.  A Parameter Sensitivity Analysis on Multiple Finite Element Knee Joint Models.

Authors:  Nynke B Rooks; Thor F Besier; Marco T Y Schneider
Journal:  Front Bioeng Biotechnol       Date:  2022-05-26

3.  A Method to Compare Heterogeneous Types of Bone and Cartilage Meshes.

Authors:  Nynke B Rooks; Marco T Y Schneider; Ahmet Erdemir; Jason P Halloran; Peter J Laz; Kevin B Shelburne; Donald R Hume; Carl W Imhauser; William Zaylor; Shady Elmasry; Ariel Schwartz; Snehal K Chokhandre; Neda Abdollahi Nohouji; Thor F Besier
Journal:  J Biomech Eng       Date:  2021-11-01       Impact factor: 2.097

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.