Searching the Resource Information Network

Our searching services are busy right now. Please try again later

  • Register
X
Forgot Password

If you have forgotten your password you can enter your email here and get a temporary password sent to your email.

X

Leaving Community

Are you sure you want to leave this community? Leaving the community will revoke any permissions you have been granted in this community.

No
Yes

Evaluation and validation of 2D biomechanical models of the knee for radiograph-based preoperative planning in total knee arthroplasty.

Malte Asseln | Jörg Eschweiler | Adam Trepczynski | Philipp Damm | Klaus Radermacher
PloS one | 2020

Thorough preoperative planning in total knee arthroplasty is essential to reduce implant failure by proper implant sizing and alignment. The "gold standard" in conventional preoperative planning is based on anterior-posterior long-leg radiographs. However, the coronal component alignment is still an open discussion in literature, since studies have reported contradictory outcomes on survivorship, indicating that optimal individual alignment goals still need to be defined. Two-dimensional biomechanical models of the knee have the potential to predict joint forces and, therefore, objectify therapy planning. Previously published two-dimensional biomechanical models were evaluated and validated for the first time in this study by comparison of model predictions to corresponding in vivo measurements obtained from telemetric implants for a one- and two-leg stance. Model input parameters were acquired from weight-bearing anterior-posterior long-leg radiographs and statistical assumptions for patient-specific model adaptation. The overall time from initialization to load prediction was in the range of 7-8 minutes per patient for all models. However, no model could accurately predict the correct trend of knee joint forces over patients. Two dimensional biomechanical models of the knee have the potential to improve preoperative planning in total knee arthroplasty by providing additional individual biomechanical information to the surgeon. Although integration into the clinical workflow might be performed with acceptable costs, the models' accuracy is insufficient for the moment. Future work is needed for model optimization and more sophisticated modelling approaches.

Pubmed ID: 31914159

Research resources used in this publication

None found

Antibodies used in this publication

None found

Associated grants

None

Publication data is provided by the National Library of Medicine ® and PubMed ®. Data is retrieved from PubMed ® on a weekly schedule. For terms and conditions see the National Library of Medicine Terms and Conditions.

This is a list of tools and resources that we have found mentioned in this publication.


MATLAB (tool)

RRID:SCR_001622

Multi paradigm numerical computing environment and fourth generation programming language developed by MathWorks. Allows matrix manipulations, plotting of functions and data, implementation of algorithms, creation of user interfaces, and interfacing with programs written in other languages, including C, C++, Java, Fortran and Python. Used to explore and visualize ideas and collaborate across disciplines including signal and image processing, communications, control systems, and computational finance.

View all literature mentions

German Research Foundation (tool)

RRID:SCR_012946

German research awards.Central self governing research funding organisation in Germany. Serves sciences and humanities and promotes research at universities and non-university research institutions. The focus is on funding projects developed by academic community.

View all literature mentions

German Research Foundation (tool)

RRID:SCR_012420

German research awards.Central self governing research funding organisation in Germany. Serves sciences and humanities and promotes research at universities and non-university research institutions. The focus is on funding projects developed by academic community.

View all literature mentions