Download PDF
Methods Inf Med 2016; 55(01): 98-105
DOI: 10.3414/ME14-02-0022
Focus Theme – Original Articles
Schattauer GmbH

ACL Reconstruction Decision Support[*]

Personalized Simulation of the Lachman Test and Custom Activities
D. Stanev
1   Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, University of Patras, Patras, Greece
,
K. Moustakas
1   Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, University of Patras, Patras, Greece
,
J. Gliatis
2   Department of Orthopedics, School of Medicine, University of Patras, Patras, Greece
,
C. Koutsojannis
3   Department of Physiotherapy, Technological Educational Institute (TEI) of Western Greece, Aigion, Greece
› Author Affiliations
Further Information

Publication History

Received 23 November 2014

Accepted 22 September 2015

Publication Date:
08 January 2018 (online)

    Permissions and Reprints

Summary

Introduction: This article is part of the Focus Theme of Methods of Information in Medicine on “Methodologies, Models and Algorithms for Patients Rehabilitation”. Objectives: The objective of the proposed approach is to develop a clinical decision support system (DSS) that will help clinicians optimally plan the ACL reconstruction procedure in a patient specific manner. Methods: A full body model is developed in this study with 23 degrees of freedom and 93 muscles. The knee ligaments are modeled as non-linear spring-damper systems and a tibiofemoral contact model was utilized. The parameters of the ligaments were calibrated based on an optimization criterion. Forward dynamics were utilized during simulation for predicting the model’s response to a given set of external forces, posture configuration and physiological parameters. Results: The proposed model is quantified using MRI scans and measurements of the well-known Lachman test, on several patients with a torn ACL. The clinical potential of the proposed framework is demonstrated in the context of flexion-extension, gait and jump actions. The clinician is able to modify and fine tune several parameters such as the number of bundles, insertion position on the tibia or femur and the resting length that correspond to the choices of the surgical procedure and study their effect on the bio-mechanical behavior of the knee. Conclusion: Computational knee models can be used to predict the effect of surgical decisions and to give insight on how different parameters can affect the stability of the knee. Special focus has to be given in proper calibration and experimental validation.

Keywords

Virtual physiological human - ACL reconstruction - simulation - digital patient - dynamics

* Supplementary online material published on our website http://dx.doi.org/10.3414/ME14-02-0022


 

  • References

  • 1 Fregly B, Besier T, Lloyd D, Delp S, Banks S, Pandy M. et al. Grand challenge competition to predict in vivo knee loads. Journal of Orthopaedic Research 2011; 30 (Suppl. 04) 503-513.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Weiss J, Gardiner J. Computational Modeling of Ligament Mechanics. Critical Reviews™ in Biomedical Engineering 2001; 29 (Suppl. 03) 303-371.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Gooßen A, Weber GM, Dries SPM. Automatic Joint Alignment Measurements in Pre- and Postoperative Long Leg Standing Radiographs. Methods Inf Med 2012; 51 (Suppl. 05) 406-414.
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Tsipouriaris A, Kogkas A, Triantafyllou C, Moustakas K, Koutsojannis C. Simulation of ACL reconstruction dynamics for optimal rehabilitation planning. In: 8th International Conference on Pervasive Computing Technologies for Healthcare. Oldenburg, Germany: 2014
    Google Scholar
  • 5 Fardoun H, Mashat A, Lange B. New methodologies for patients rehabilitation. Methods Inf Med 2015; 54 (Suppl. 02) 111-113.
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Bei Y, Fregly BJ. Multibody dynamic simulation of knee contact mechanics. Medical Engineering & Physics 2004; 26 (Suppl. 09) 777-789.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Blankevoort L, Kuiper JH, Huiskes R, Grootenboer HJ. Articular contact in a three-dimensional model of the knee. Journal of Biomechanical Engineering 1991; 24 (Suppl. 11) 1019-1031.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Blankevoort L, Huiskes R. Validation of a three- dimensional model of the knee. Journal of Bio-mechanical Engineering 1996; 29 (Suppl. 07) 955-961.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Kar J, Quesada PM. A musculoskeletal modeling approach for estimating anterior cruciate ligament strains and knee anterior-posterior shear forces in stop-jumps performed by young recreational female athletes. Annals of Biomedical Engineering 2013; 41 (Suppl. 02) 338-348.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Piazza SJ, Delp SL. Three-Dimensional Dynamic Simulation of Total Knee Replacement Motion During a Step-Up Task. Journal of Biomechanical Engineering 2001; 123 (Suppl. 06) 599-606.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Katherine HB, Guess TM, Maletsky L, Dodd K. Computational Knee Ligament Modeling Using Experimentally Determined Zero-Load Lengths. Journal of Biomechanical Engineering 2012; 6: 33-41.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Xu H, Bloswick D, Merryweather A. An improved OpenSim gait model with multiple degrees of freedom knee joint and knee ligaments. Computer methods in biomechanics and biomedical engineering. 2014 DOI: 10.1080/10255842.2014. 889689.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Weiss JA, Gardiner JC, Ellis BJ, Lujan TJ, Phatak NS. Three-dimensional finite element modeling of ligaments: Technical aspects. Medical Engineering & Physics 2005; 27 (Suppl. 10) 845-861.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Anderson FC, Pandy MG. A dynamic optimization solution for vertical jumping in three dimensions. Computer Methods in Biomechanics and Biomedical Engineering 1999; 2: 201-231.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Pandy M. Computer modeling and simulation of human movement. Annals of Biomedical Engineering 2001; 3: 245-273.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Seth A, Sherman M, Reinbold J, Delp S. OpenSim: a musculoskeletal modeling and simulation framework for in silico investigations and exchange. IUTAM Symposium on Human Body Dynamics 2011; 2: 212-232.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Pérez-González A, Fenollosa-Esteve C, Sancho-Bru J, Sánchez-Marín F, Vergara M, Rodríguez-Cervantes P. A modified elastic foundation contact model for application in 3d models of the prosthetic knee. Medical Engineering & Physics 2008; 30 (Suppl. 03) 387-398.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Sherman M, Seth A, Delp S. What is a moment arm? Calculating muscle effectiveness in biomechanical models using generalized coordinates. In: Proc ASME Des Eng Tech Conf. 2013
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Delp S, Anderson F, Arnold A, Loan P, Habib A, Chand J. et al. OpenSim: Open-Source Software to Create and Analyze Dynamic Simulations of Movement. IEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering 2007; 54 (Suppl. 11) 1940-1950.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Eck CF, van den Bekerom MP, Poolman RW, Kerkhoffs GM. Methods to diagnose acute anterior cruciate ligament rupture: a meta-analysis of physical examination with and without anaesthesia. Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy 2013; 21 (Suppl. 08) 895-903.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Benjaminse A, Gokeler A, van der Schans CP. Clinical Diagnosis of an Anterior Cruciate Ligament Rupture: A Meta-analysis. The Journal of orthopaedic and sports physical therapy 2006; 36 (Suppl. 05) 267-288.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Muellner T, Bugge W, Johansen S, Holtan C, Engebretsen L. Inter- and intratester comparison of the Rolimeter knee tester: effect of tester’s experience and the examination technique. Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy 2001; 9: 302-206.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 23 Hatcher J, Hatcher A, Arbuthnot J, McNicholas M. An investigation to examine the inter-tester and intra-tester reliability of the Rolimeter knee tester, and its sensitivity in identifying knee joint laxity. Journal of Orthopaedic Research 2005; 23 (Suppl. 06) 1399-1403.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 24 Balasch H, Schiller M, Friebel H, Hoffmann F. Evaluation of anterior knee joint instability with the Rolimeter. A test in comparison with manual assessment and measuring with the KT-1000 arthrometer. Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy 1999; 7 (Suppl. 04) 204-208.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 25 Ganko A, Engebretsen L, Ozer H. The rolimeter: a new arthrometer compared with the KT-1000. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 2000; 8 (Suppl. 01) 36-39.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 26 Liu F, Yue B, Gadikota H, Kozanek M, Liu W, Gill T. et al. Morphology of the medial collateral ligament of the knee. Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Research. 2010 5 (69).
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 27 Cohen S, VanBeek C, Starman J, Armfield D, Irrqanq J, Fu F. MRI measurement of the 2 bundles of the normal anterior cruciate ligament. Orthopedics. 2009 32 (9).
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 28 Yang N, Canavan P, Nayeb-Hashemi H, Najafi B, Vaziri A. Protocol for constructing subject-specific biomechanical models of knee joint. Computer Methods in Biomechanics and Biomedical Engineering 2010; 13 (Suppl. 05) 589-603.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 29 Valente G, Pitto L, Testi D, Seth A, Delp S, Stagni R. et al. Are Subject-Specific Musculoskeletal Models Robust to the Unvertainties in Parameter Identifications?. PLoS One 2014 9 11
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 30 Shelburne MB, Pandy MG, Torry MR. Comparison of shear forces and ligament loading in the healthy and ACL-deficient knee during gait. Journal of Biomechanics 2004; 37: 313-319.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 31 Yamaguchi G, Zajac F. A planar model of the knee joint to characterize the knee extensor mechanism. Journal of Bomechanics 1989; 22 (Suppl. 01) 1-10.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 32 Myers C, Laz P, Shelburne K, Davidson B. A Probabilistic Approach to Quantify the Impact of Uncertainty Propagation in Musculoskeletal Simulations. Annals of Biomedical Engineering 2015; 43 (Suppl. 05) 1098-1111.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 33 Ehrhardt J, Ehrhardt H, Plötz W, Pöppl S. Atlas-Based Recognition of Anatomical Structures and Landmarks to Support the Virtual Three-Dimensional Planning of Hip Operations. Methods Inf Med 2004; 43 (Suppl. 04) 391-397.
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar