Effect of six degrees of freedom knee kinematics on ligament length and moment arm in an intact knee model

Abstract

Abstract. BACKGROUND:Biomechanics studies can help improve athletic performance. However, the biomechanics of knee joint ligament length changes and moment arms over six degrees of freedom (DOF) have yet to be established. OBJECTIVE: To construct a knee model to investigate the length and moment arm changes of the anterior cruciate ligament (ACL), posterior cruciate ligament (PCL), medial collateral ligament (MCL), and lateral collateral ligament (LCL). METHOD: Six DOF joint modeling and analysis were performed using specialized modeling software. RESULTS: The length of all ligaments varied with tibiofemoral flexion angle, contributed to joint motion, and restrained the joint in different positions. The ACL, MCL, and LCL lengths decreased, the PCL increased, the posterior tibial translation increased, the MCL moment arm increased, and the LCL moment arm decreased between 0• and 90• . The primary ligament restraints were the PCL (0, and PCL (60The restraining function of each ligament during motion can be modeled based on changes in ligament lengths during tibial translations and rotations during flexion. Understanding the correlations between ligament lengths and moment arm changes over a wide range of motion will help improve our understanding of joint kinematics and may be useful for the diagnosis and treatment of sports injury.

The effect of modelling parameters in the development and validation of knee joint models on ligament mechanics: A systematic review

“…According to the quality assessment results presented in Table 2 , several articles had limited modelling technique descriptions [ 15 , 16 , 19 , 20 , 27 , 33 ] and validation methods [ 16 , 18 , 25 , 27 , 35 , 37 , 38 ]. In 12 of the selected studies [ 14 – 17 , 20 , 24 – 27 , 31 , 37 , 38 ], the sensitivity of the model outputs on ligament model parameters has not been assessed.…”

“…A range of musculoskeletal modelling software packages has been used across the selected studies ( Fig 2A and Table 3 ). 14 studies [ 15 – 17 , 20 – 25 , 27 , 29 , 32 , 34 , 35 ] used OpenSim [ 39 ], four studies [ 18 , 36 – 38 ] used SIMM [ 40 ], two studies [ 26 , 28 ] used AnyBody Modelling System (AnyBody Technology, Aalborg, Denmark), one study [ 30 ] used ADAMS [ 41 ], one study [ 14 ] used SimWise-4D platform (Design Simulation Technologies, DST, Canton, MI, USA), one study [ 19 ] used KneeSIM (LifeModeler Inc., San Clemente, CA), one study [ 33 ] used Musculoskeletal Joint Modeler [ 42 ], and one study [ 31 ] used Working Model 3D (Working Model 3D, MSC, Software Corp., Santa Ana, CA, USA).…”

“…Out of the 25 studies included, 20 studies were designed to simulate the intact knee joint [ 14 – 17 , 19 – 22 , 24 – 27 , 29 – 34 , 37 , 38 ], two studies modelled both intact and ACL-deficient knee [ 35 , 36 ], one study modelled the intact and PCL-deficient knees [ 28 ], one study modelled the ACL-reconstructed knee [ 18 ], and one study modelled the lateral extra-articular reconstructed knee [ 23 ] ( Fig 2B and Table 3 ). Nine studies modelled one leg [ 19 , 21 , 23 , 24 , 29 – 31 , 33 , 36 ], eight studies developed the whole-body models [ 15 , 16 , 20 , 22 , 26 – 28 , 34 ] and eight studies modelled the lower-body [ 14 , 17 , 18 , 25 , 32 , 35 , 37 , 38 ] ( Fig 2C and Table 3 ).…”

“…These models included geometry from 127 participants/patients’ knees and three cadaveric knees. Intact knee geometries were extracted fully or partially from segmented medical imaging (CT or MRI) of cadaveric specimens [ 25 , 26 , 30 ], participants [ 14 , 21 , 23 , 24 , 29 , 31 , 36 ], patients [ 18 , 22 ], saw bone [ 33 ] or by scaling the generic reference models based on anthropometric data of study participants [ 15 – 17 , 20 , 21 , 27 , 28 , 32 , 34 , 35 , 37 ] ( Fig 2D and Table 3 ). In the rest of the studies, the geometry was taken from available data in the literature [ 19 , 38 ].…”

“…Six studies included the femoral and tibial cartilages [ 14 , 18 , 26 , 28 , 30 , 33 ] and three studies had the femoral cartilage only [ 17 , 25 , 29 ] ( Fig 2E and Table 3 ). The remainder of the studies did not consider cartilage geometry.…”