2017
DOI: 10.1016/j.jbiomech.2017.01.015
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Tibio-femoral joint contact in healthy and osteoarthritic knees during quasi-static squat: A bi-planar X-ray analysis

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

5
25
1

Year Published

2018
2018
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
5
1

Relationship

1
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 20 publications
(36 citation statements)
references
References 23 publications
5
25
1
Order By: Relevance
“…Concerning the femoro-tibial joint, Zeighami et al reported RMS errors of in average 0.63 • for all rotations and 0.8 mm for all translations using the same modality (EOS system) and a semi-automatic method of registration [27]. These results are similar to the ones obtained in the present study ( Table 2) by using a manual method.…”
Section: In Vitro Accuracysupporting
confidence: 90%
See 3 more Smart Citations
“…Concerning the femoro-tibial joint, Zeighami et al reported RMS errors of in average 0.63 • for all rotations and 0.8 mm for all translations using the same modality (EOS system) and a semi-automatic method of registration [27]. These results are similar to the ones obtained in the present study ( Table 2) by using a manual method.…”
Section: In Vitro Accuracysupporting
confidence: 90%
“…The apparent discrepancy of these results can be attributed to both the different experimental conditions and the choice of coordinate systems. In a study using the same modality and definition of femur and tibia coordinate systems, Zeighami et al reported an amplitude of medial rotation during the first 20 • of flexion of the knee of 11.8 • in average for ten healthy subjects close to the value obtained in the present study [27].…”
Section: Femoro-tibial Knee Kinematic Patternssupporting
confidence: 87%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…However, recent methods could estimate knee contact parameters in weight-bearing conditions using either bi-plane fluoroscopy (Farrokhi et al, 2016;Farrokhi et al, 2014), or bi-plane low-dose radiography (Zeighami et al, 2017). Biplane imaging allows for a relatively small registration error and yields an estimation of CPs based on the concept of minimal bone-to-bone distance (Zeighami et al, 2017).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%