Kinematic characteristics of the tibiofemoral joint during a step-up activity

Abstract

The step-up activity (stair-ascending) is an important daily function of the knee. This study aimed to investigate the articular cartilage contact kinematics on both tibial and femoral cartilage surfaces and describe the femoral condylar motion using the transepicondylar axis (TEA) and the geometric center axis (GCA) during a step-up activity. Twenty-one healthy subjects were included and their knee joint models were reconstructed using MR images. A single-stair step-up activity was imaged using a dual-fluoroscopic imaging system. Three-dimensional knee joint contact points were determined and projected onto the tibial plateau and femoral condyle surfaces. The contact points on the medial and lateral tibial plateau moved anteriorly (by 13.5 ± 3.2 and 10.7 ± 5.0 mm, respectively, p>0.05) with knee extension. The contact points on the medial and lateral femoral condyle moved from the posterior to the anterior portion (by 32.2 ± 4.9 mm and 25.5 ± 4.2 mm, respectively, p<0.05) and were located on the inner half of the femoral cartilage throughout the activity. The data on articular contact kinematics and the femoral condylar motion described using the TEA and GCA indicated that the medial and lateral compartments had similar motion patterns during the step-up activity. The knee does not demonstrate a medial-pivoting motion character during the step-up activity. The data may provide insight to contemporary TKA development.

Response of knee cartilage T1rho and T2 relaxation times to in vivo mechanical loading in individuals with and without knee osteoarthritis

“…As the knee flexes, the contact points undergo greater excursion on the femoral condyle when compared to the tibial plateau by virtue of the difference in shapes of the two articular surfaces. [1, 30–31] As such, the convex femur undergoes both compressive and shear forces. In contrast, the tibia is relatively flat and experiences less shear.…”

“…Finite element and mathematical models have explored the effects of disruption of the extracellular matrix on the joint biomechanical properties. [1] However, in vivo analysis of cartilage response to loads in healthy and diseased states remains understudied, mostly due to the challenges with quantifying cartilage composition non-invasively.…”

Prediction of In Vivo Knee Joint Kinematics Using a Combined Dual Fluoroscopy Imaging and Statistical Shape Modeling Technique

“…In recent years, combined CT-or MR-based models and X-ray images have been widely used to determine in vivo human knee joint kinematics [2,5,19,28]. While these studies have greatly advanced our knowledge on human knee joint physiological motion, CT imaging requires ion radiation exposure and MR imaging requires time consuming image segmentations [6].…”

“…In these applications, a necessary step is to construct a 3D knee joint model using either CT images [1][2][3] or MR images [4][5][6]. The 3D knee joint model is then combined with a series of 2D X-ray (or fluoroscopy) images captured during in vivo joint motions to reproduce the knee joint poses in space using a 2D-3D imaging registration procedure [1][2][3][4][5][6]. Although CT images can be semi-automatically segmented to construct the model of the knee, CT imaging is costly, and the radiation exposure might cause concerns on potential health risk of the subject [7].…”

In-vivo analysis of flexion axes of the knee: Femoral condylar motion during dynamic knee flexion

“…A flexion axis is important for measurement of the knee joint kinematics (Asano et al, 2005; Eckhoff et al, 2007; Li et al, 2013; Most et al, 2004; Victor et al, 2009) and for component alignment in total knee arthroplasty (TKA) (Colle et al, 2012; Matziolis et al, 2011; Victor et al, 2009). The transepicondylar axis (TEA) and the geometrical center axis (GCA) are widely used in knee joint kinematics analysis (Asano et al, 2001; Berger et al, 1993; Eckhoff et al, 2007; Li et al, 2013; Matsuda et al, 2003; Most et al, 2004; Oussedik et al, 2012; Victor et al, 2009).…”