The effect of using different coordinate systems on in-vivo hip angles can be estimated from computed tomography images

Uemura, Keisuke; Atkins, Penny R.; Anderson, Andrew E.

doi:10.1016/j.jbiomech.2019.109318

Cited by 5 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 16 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Based on clinical practice and literature review, we selected the femoral coordinate system (xyz) proposed by the International Society of Biomechanics (ISB) 17–19 . The anatomical landmarks for the coordinate system of ISB (fISB) included the femoral head center and the medial and lateral femoral epicondyle 17 .…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Based on clinical practice and literature review, we selected the femoral coordinate system (xyz) proposed by the International Society of Biomechanics (ISB). [17][18][19] The anatomical landmarks for the coordinate system of ISB (fISB) included the femoral head center and the medial and lateral femoral epicondyle. 17 The fISB described the vertical axis (z-axis) as the longitudinal line between the femoral head center and the midpoint of the two epicondyles.…”

Section: Simulation Of Femoral Motion During the Radiographymentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Quantification of femoral position on radiographic acetabular coverage in children

Sha

Yan

et al. 2022

Journal Orthopaedic Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

An accurate assessment of the radiographic acetabular coverage is essential for clinical diagnosis or surgical decision‐making in hip disorders. This study aimed to evaluate the effect of femoral position on acetabular coverage and to predict the actual acetabular coverage from nonstandard radiographs. A total of 21 children (34 hips) with normative acetabular coverage were screened in this retrospective study. The Mimics‐based local‐rotation fluoroscopy simulation method was used to tilt, incline, and rotate the femur in 4° increments within the range of femoral motion. The acetabular coverage, namely acetabular‐head index (AHI) and center‐edge angle (CEA), increased with femoral abduction but decreased with other motions. Compared to the femoral neutral position, no significant differences were identified in AHI with the rotation (range: 0°–16°) and in CEA with the tilt (range: −20°–4°), inclination (range: 0°–4°), or rotation (range: −8°–40°). The linear regression analysis showed that the CEA increased by about 0.20° for each 1° increase in femoral inclination and decreased by about 0.01°, 0.07°, 0.06°, or 0.07° for each 1° increase in internal rotation, external rotation, flexion, or extension, respectively. And a more significant change in AHI was observed. All femoral malpositions, especially the inclination, affected radiographic acetabular coverage in children. Therefore, each pelvic radiograph should assess potential femoral malpositioning before diagnosing hip disorders. This study will assist surgeons in predicting the acetabular coverage on nonstandard radiographs.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Simulation Of Femoral Motion During the Radiographymentioning

confidence: 99%

Quantification of femoral position on radiographic acetabular coverage in children

Sha

Yan

et al. 2022

Journal Orthopaedic Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The TTP is formed by three points: the most posterior point of the medial and lateral femoral condyle (MPC, LPC) and the most posterior point of the trochanteric crest (PTC) 38 . Three separate parts of the femur are used for the detection: the medial and lateral condyle and the proximal part without the head resected at the neck.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The origin of each coordinate system is the FHC. Name Wu2002 32 Bergmann2016 5 TableTop 38 1st axis The epicondylar axis defined by the MEC and LEC The posterior condylar axis defined by the MPC and LPC The posterior condylar axis defined by the MPC and LPC 2nd axis The mechanical axis defined by the midpoint between the epicondyles and the FHC The straight femur axis defined by the ICN and the point of the neck axis closest to the shaft axis The normal of the TTP defined by the MPC, LPC and PTC Distoproximal axis The mechanical axis The straight femur axis The orthogonal of the mediolateral and posteroanterior axis Mediolateral axis The orthogonal of the posteroanterior and distoproximal axis The orthogonal of the posteroanterior and distoproximal axis The posterior condylar axis Posteroanterior axis The orthogonal of the distoproximal and epicondylar axis The orthogonal of the distoproximal and the posterior condylar axis The normal of the TTP …”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

A robust method for automatic identification of femoral landmarks, axes, planes and bone coordinate systems using surface models

Fischer

Grothues

Habor

et al. 2020

Sci Rep

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The identification of femoral landmarks is a common procedure in multiple academic fields. Femoral bone coordinate systems are used particularly in orthopedics and biomechanics, and are defined by landmarks, axes and planes. A fully automatic detection overcomes the drawbacks of a labor-intensive manual identification. In this paper, a new automatic atlas- and a priori knowledge-based approach that processes femoral surface models, called the A&A method, was evaluated. The A&A method is divided in two stages. Firstly, a single atlas-based registration maps landmarks and areas from a template surface to the subject. In the second stage, landmarks, axes and planes that are used to construct several femoral bone coordinate systems are refined using a priori knowledge. Three common femoral coordinate systems are defined by the landmarks detected. The A&A method proved to be very robust against a variation of the spatial alignment of the surface models. The results of the A&A method and a manual identification were compared. No significant rotational differences existed for the bone coordinate system recommended by the International Society of Biomechanics. Minor significant differences of maximally 0.5° were observed for the two other coordinate systems. This might be clinically irrelevant, depending on the context of use and should, therefore, be evaluated by the potential user regarding the specific application. The entire source code of the A&A method and the data used in the study is open source and can be accessed via https://github.com/RWTHmediTEC/FemoralCoordinateSystem.

show abstract

“…The 3D video fluoroscopic analysis was performed to assess joint motion of the replaced ankle (60). DF and CT imaging techniques were both employed to calculate in-vivo hip kinematics, along with model-based tracking, to compare the effect of different coordinate systems (61). Since marker-based systems are unable to accurately analyze talocrural or subtalar motion because the talus lacks palpable landmarks to place external markers (54), digitized video fluoroscopy was reportedly used to determine the sagittal plane motion of the medial longitudinal arch during dynamic gait (62).…”

Section: Imaging Techniques For Gait Assessmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

Present and future of gait assessment in clinical practice: Towards the application of novel trends and technologies

Hulleck

Mohan

Abdallah

et al. 2022

Front. Med. Technol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundDespite being available for more than three decades, quantitative gait analysis remains largely associated with research institutions and not well leveraged in clinical settings. This is mostly due to the high cost/cumbersome equipment and complex protocols and data management/analysis associated with traditional gait labs, as well as the diverse training/experience and preference of clinical teams. Observational gait and qualitative scales continue to be predominantly used in clinics despite evidence of less efficacy of quantifying gait.Research objectiveThis study provides a scoping review of the status of clinical gait assessment, including shedding light on common gait pathologies, clinical parameters, indices, and scales. We also highlight novel state-of-the-art gait characterization and analysis approaches and the integration of commercially available wearable tools and technology and AI-driven computational platforms.MethodsA comprehensive literature search was conducted within PubMed, Web of Science, Medline, and ScienceDirect for all articles published until December 2021 using a set of keywords, including normal and pathological gait, gait parameters, gait assessment, gait analysis, wearable systems, inertial measurement units, accelerometer, gyroscope, magnetometer, insole sensors, electromyography sensors. Original articles that met the selection criteria were included.Results and significanceClinical gait analysis remains highly observational and is hence subjective and largely influenced by the observer's background and experience. Quantitative Instrumented gait analysis (IGA) has the capability of providing clinicians with accurate and reliable gait data for diagnosis and monitoring but is limited in clinical applicability mainly due to logistics. Rapidly emerging smart wearable technology, multi-modality, and sensor fusion approaches, as well as AI-driven computational platforms are increasingly commanding greater attention in gait assessment. These tools promise a paradigm shift in the quantification of gait in the clinic and beyond. On the other hand, standardization of clinical protocols and ensuring their feasibility to map the complex features of human gait and represent them meaningfully remain critical challenges.

show abstract

The effect of using different coordinate systems on in-vivo hip angles can be estimated from computed tomography images

Cited by 5 publications

References 16 publications

Quantification of femoral position on radiographic acetabular coverage in children

Quantification of femoral position on radiographic acetabular coverage in children

A robust method for automatic identification of femoral landmarks, axes, planes and bone coordinate systems using surface models

Present and future of gait assessment in clinical practice: Towards the application of novel trends and technologies

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About