Format

Send to

Choose Destination
Sci Rep. 2018 Nov 26;8(1):17351. doi: 10.1038/s41598-018-35628-5.

Comparison between kinetic and kinetic-kinematic driven knee joint finite element models.

Author information

1
Department of Applied Physics, University of Eastern Finland, POB 1627, FI-70211, Kuopio, Finland. paul.bolcos@uef.fi.
2
Department of Applied Physics, University of Eastern Finland, POB 1627, FI-70211, Kuopio, Finland.
3
Department of Radiology and Biomedical Imaging, University of California San Francisco, CA, 94158, San Francisco, USA.
4
Dept. of Kinesiology & Health Promotion, University of Kentucky, Lexington, KY, 40506, USA.
5
Department of Physical Therapy and Rehabilitation Science, University of California, San Francisco, CA, 94158, USA.
6
Program of Advanced Musculoskeletal Imaging (PAMI), Department of Biomedical Engineering, Cleveland Clinic, OH, 44195, Cleveland, USA.
7
Diagnostic Imaging Centre, Kuopio University Hospital, POB 100, FI-70029, KUH, Kuopio, Finland.
8
School of Information Technology and Electrical Engineering, The University of Queensland, QLD-4072, Brisbane, Australia.

Abstract

Use of knee joint finite element models for diagnostic purposes is challenging due to their complexity. Therefore, simpler models are needed for studies where a high number of patients need to be analyzed, without compromising the results of the model. In this study, more complex, kinetic (forces and moments) and simpler, kinetic-kinematic (forces and angles) driven finite element models were compared during the stance phase of gait. Patella and tendons were included in the most complex model, while they were absent in the simplest model. The greatest difference between the most complex and simplest models was observed in the internal-external rotation and axial joint reaction force, while all other rotations, translations and joint reaction forces were similar to one another. In terms of cartilage stresses and strains, the simpler models behaved similarly with the more complex models in the lateral joint compartment, while minor differences were observed in the medial compartment at the beginning of the stance phase. We suggest that it is feasible to use kinetic-kinematic driven knee joint models with a simpler geometry in studies with a large cohort size, particularly when analyzing cartilage responses and failures related to potential overloads.

Supplemental Content

Full text links

Icon for Nature Publishing Group Icon for PubMed Central
Loading ...
Support Center