No abstract

In musculoskeletal modelling, several optimization techniques are used to calculate muscle forces, which strongly influence resultant hip contact forces (HCF). The goal of this study was to calculate muscle forces using four different optimization techniques, i.e., two different static optimization techniques, computed muscle control (CMC) and the physiological inverse approach (PIA). We investigated their subsequent effects on HCFs during gait and sit to stand and found that at the first peak in gait at 15–20% of the gait cycle, CMC calculated the highest HCFs (median 3.9 times peak GRF (pGRF)). When comparing calculated HCFs to experimental HCFs reported in literature, the former were up to 238% larger. Both static optimization techniques produced lower HCFs (median 3.0 and 3.1 pGRF), while PIA included muscle dynamics without an excessive increase in HCF (median 3.2 pGRF). The increased HCFs in CMC were potentially caused by higher muscle forces resulting from co‐contraction of agonists and antagonists around the hip. Alternatively, these higher HCFs may be caused by the slightly poorer tracking of the net joint moment by the muscle moments calculated by CMC. We conclude that the use of different optimization techniques affects calculated HCFs, and static optimization approached experimental values best. © 2014 Orthopaedic Research Society. Published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Orthop Res 33:???–???, 2015.

This study assessed the relative importance of introducing an increasing level of medical image-based subject-specific detail in bone and muscle geometry in the musculoskeletal model, on calculated hip contact forces during gait. These forces were compared to introducing minimization of hip contact forces in the optimization criterion. With an increasing level of subject-specific detail, specifically MRI-based geometry and wrapping surfaces representing the hip capsule, hip contact forces decreased and were more comparable to contact forces measured using instrumented prostheses (average difference of 0.69 BW at the first peak compared to 1.04 BW for the generic model). Inclusion of subject-specific wrapping surfaces in the model had a greater effect than altering the cost function definition.

Bone morphology and morphometric measurements of the lower limb provide significant and useful information for computer-assisted orthopedic surgery planning and intervention, surgical follow-up evaluation, and personalized prosthesis design. Femoral head radius and center, neck axis and size, femoral offset and shaft axis are morphological and functional parameters of the proximal femur utilized both in diagnosis and therapy. Obtaining this information from image data without any operator supervision or manual editing remains a practical objective to avoid variability intrinsic in the manual analysis. In this article, we propose a heuristic method that automatically computes the proximal femur morphological parameters by processing the mesh surface of the femur. The surface data are sequentially processed using geometrical properties such as symmetries, asymmetries, and principal elongation directions. Numerical methods identify the axis of the shaft of femur (least squares cylinder fitting), the head surface and center (least squares sphere fitting), and the femur neck axis and radius (minimal area of the cross section by evolutionary optimization). The repeatability of the method was tested upon 20 femur (10 left + 10 right) surfaces reconstructed from CT scans taken on cadavers. The repeatability error of the automated computation of anatomical landmarks, angles, sizes, and axes was less than 1.5 mm, 2.5 degrees, 1.0 mm, and 3.5 mm, respectively. The computed parameters were in good agreement (landmark difference: <2.0 mm; angle difference: <2.0 degrees; axes difference: <2.5 degrees; size difference: <1.5 mm) with the corresponding reference parameters manually identified in the original CT images by medical experts. In conclusion, the proposed method can improve the degree of automation of model-based hip replacement surgical systems.

Hip joint moments are an important parameter in the biomechanical evaluation of orthopaedic surgery. Joint moments are generally calculated using scaled generic musculoskeletal models. However, due to anatomical variability or pathology, such models may differ from the patient's anatomy, calling into question the accuracy of the resulting joint moments. This study aimed to quantify the potential joint moment errors caused by geometrical inaccuracies in scaled models, during gait, for eight test subjects. For comparison, a semi-automatic computed tomography (CT)-based workflow was introduced to create models with subject-specific joint locations and inertial parameters. 3D surface models of the femora and hemipelves were created by segmentation and the hip joint centres and knee axes were located in these models. The scaled models systematically located the hip joint centre (HJC) up to 33.6 mm too inferiorly. As a consequence, significant and substantial peak hip extension and abduction moment differences were recorded, with, respectively, up to 23.1% and 15.8% higher values in the image-based models. These findings reaffirm the importance of accurate HJC estimation, which may be achieved using CT- or radiography-based subject-specific modelling. However, obesity-related gait analysis marker placement errors may have influenced these results and more research is needed to overcome these artefacts.