Coordinate system requirements to determine motions of the tibiofemoral joint free from kinematic crosstalk errors

Critical Examination of Methods to Determine Tibiofemoral Kinematics and Tibial Contact Kinematics Based on Analysis of Fluoroscopic Images

Goals of knee replacement surgery are to restore function and maximize implant longevity. To determine how well these goals are satisfied, tibial femoral kinematics and tibial contact kinematics are of interest. Tibiofemoral kinematics, which characterize function, is movement between the tibia and femur whereas tibial contact kinematics, which is relevant to implant wear, is movement of the location of contact by the femoral implant on the tibial articular surface. The purposes of this review article are to describe and critique relevant methods to guide correct implementation. For tibiofemoral kinematics, methods are categorized as those which determine (1) relative planar motions and (2) relative three-dimensional (3D) motions. Planar motions are determined by first finding anterior-posterior (A-P) positions of each femoral condyle relative to the tibia and tracking these positions during flexion. Of the lowest point (LP) and flexion facet center (FFC) methods, which are common, the lowest point method is preferred and the reasoning is explained. 3D motions are determined using the joint coordinate system (JCS) of Grood and Suntay. Previous applications of this JCS have resulted in motions which are largely in error due to "kinematic crosstalk." Requirements for minimizing kinematic crosstalk are outlined followed by an example, which demonstrates the method for identifying a JCS that minimizes kinematic crosstalk. Although kinematic crosstalk can be minimized, the need for a JCS to determine 3D motions is questionable based on anatomical constraints, which limit varus-valgus rotation and compression-distraction translation. Methods for analyzing tibial contact kinematics are summarized and validation of methods discussed.

Ultrasound-based bone tracking using cross-correlation enables dynamic measurements of knee kinematics during clinical assessments

Purpose

Measuring joint kinematics in the clinic is important for diagnosing injuries, tracking healing and guiding treatments; however, current methods are limited by accuracy and/or feasibility of widespread clinical adoption. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to develop and validate an ultrasound (US)-based method for measuring knee kinematics during clinical assessments.

Methods

We mimicked four clinical laxity assessments (i.e., anterior, posterior, varus, valgus) on five human cadaver knees using our robotic testing system. We simultaneously collected B-mode cine loops with an US transducer. We computed the errors in kinematics between those measured using our bone-tracking algorithm, which cross-correlated regions of interest across frames of the cine loops, and those measured using optical motion capture with bone pins. Additionally, we conducted studies to determine the effects of loading rate and transducer placement on kinematics measured using our US-based bone tracking.

Results

Pooling the trials at experimental speeds and those downsampled to replicate clinical laxity assessments, the maximum root-mean-square errors of knee kinematics using our bone-tracking algorithm were 2.2 mm and 1.3° for the anterior-posterior and varus-valgus laxity assessments, respectively. Repeated laxity assessments proved to have good-to-excellent repeatability (intraclass correlation coefficients [ICCs] of 0.81-0.99), but ICCs from repositioning the transducer varied more widely, ranging from poor-to-good reproducibility (0.19-0.89).

Conclusion

Our results demonstrate that US is capable of tracking knee kinematics during dynamic movement. Because US is a safe and commonly used imaging modality, when paired with our bone-tracking algorithm, US has the potential to assess dynamic knee kinematics across a wide variety of applications in the clinic.

Level of Evidence

Not applicable.

[Scientific methods for in-vitro investigations in the field of joint kinematics : Cluster experimental joint kinematics]

In vitro studies are an established method to determine joint kinematics for answering preclinical questions regarding the effects of new treatment options, surgical techniques or implant designs. The lack of standardized, interdisciplinary representation in the determination of joint kinematics poses a problem. In addition to representation forms such as the "neutral-zero method" or the description of movements within the three basic planes, there are other mathematical joint-specific representations of individual working groups. The International Society of Biomechanics (ISB) has already made recommendations for standardization, but most of these cannot be implemented in biomechanical in-vitro studies. The cluster has therefore set itself the goal of standardizing in-vitro test methods in order to achieve better comparability of scientific results from different working groups.

Sensor-to-Bone Calibration with the Fusion of IMU and Bi-Plane X-rays

Inertial measurement units (IMUs) need sensor-to-segment calibration to measure human kinematics. Multiple methods exist, but, when assessing populations with locomotor function pathologies, multiple limitations arise, including holding postures (limited by joint pain and stiffness), performing specific tasks (limited by lack of selectivity) or hypothesis on limb alignment (limited by bone deformity and joint stiffness). We propose a sensor-to-bone calibration based on bi-plane X-rays and a specifically designed fusion box to measure IMU orientation with respect to underlying bones. Eight patients undergoing total hip arthroplasty with bi-plane X-rays in their clinical pathway participated in the study. Patients underwent bi-plane X-rays with fusion box and skin markers followed by a gait analysis with IMUs and a marker-based method. The validity of the pelvis, thigh and hip kinematics measured with a conventional sensor-to-segment calibration and with the sensor-to-bone calibration were compared. Results showed (1) the feasibility of the fusion of bi-plane X-rays and IMUs in measuring the orientation of anatomical axes, and (2) higher validity of the sensor-to-bone calibration for the pelvic tilt and similar validity for other degrees of freedom. The main strength of this novel calibration is to remove conventional hypotheses on joint and segment orientations that are frequently violated in pathological populations.

A frame orientation optimisation method for consistent interpretation of kinematic signals

In clinical movement biomechanics, kinematic data are often depicted as waveforms (i.e. signals), characterising the motion of articulating joints. Clinically meaningful interpretations of the underlying joint kinematics, however, require an objective understanding of whether two different kinematic signals actually represent two different underlying physical movement patterns of the joint or not. Previously, the accuracy of IMU-based knee joint angles was assessed using a six-degrees-of-freedom joint simulator guided by fluoroscopy-based signals. Despite implementation of sensor-to-segment corrections, observed errors were clearly indicative of cross-talk, and thus inconsistent reference frame orientations. Here, we address these limitations by exploring how minimisation of dedicated cost functions can harmonise differences in frame orientations, ultimately facilitating consistent interpretation of articulating joint kinematic signals. In this study, we present and investigate a frame orientation optimisation method (FOOM) that aligns reference frames and corrects for cross-talk errors, hence yielding a consistent interpretation of the underlying movement patterns. By executing optimised rotational sequences, thus producing angular corrections around each axis, we enable a reproducible frame definition and hence an approach for reliable comparison of kinematic data. Using this approach, root-mean-square errors between the previously collected (1) IMU-based data using functional joint axes, and (2) simulated fluoroscopy-based data relying on geometrical axes were almost entirely eliminated from an initial range of 0.7°-5.1° to a mere 0.1°-0.8°. Our results confirm that different local segment frames can yield different kinematic patterns, despite following the same rotation convention, and that appropriate alignment of reference frame orientation can successfully enable consistent kinematic interpretation.

Joint Coordinate System Using Functional Axes Achieves Clinically Meaningful Kinematics of the Tibiofemoral Joint as Compared to the International Society of Biomechanics Recommendation

Quantification of clinically meaningful tibiofemoral motions requires a joint coordinate system (JCS) with motions free from kinematic crosstalk errors. The objectives were to use a JCS with literature-backed functional axes (FUNC) and a JCS recommended by the International Society of Biomechanics (ISB) to determine tibiofemoral kinematics of the native (i.e., healthy) knee, determine variability associated with each JCS, and determine whether the FUNC JCS significantly reduced kinematic crosstalk errors compared to the ISB JCS. Based on a kinematic model consisting of a three-cylindric joint chain, the FUNC JCS included functional flexion-extension (F-E) and internal-external (I-E) tibial rotation axes. In contrast, the ISB JCS included F-E and I-E axes defined using anatomic landmarks. Single-plane fluoroscopic images in 13 subjects performing a weighted deep knee bend were analyzed. Tibiofemoral kinematics using the FUNC JCS fell within the physiological range of motion in all six degrees-of-freedom. Internal tibial rotation averaged 13 deg for the FUNC JCS versus 10 deg for the ISB JCS and motions in the other four degrees-of-freedom (collectively termed off-axis motions) were minimal as expected based on biomechanical constraints. Off-axis motions for the ISB JCS were significantly greater; maximum valgus rotation was 4 deg and maximum anterior and distraction translations were 9 mm and 25 mm, respectively, which is not physiologic. Variabilities in off-axis motions were significantly greater with the ISB JCS (p < 0.0002). The FUNC JCS achieved clinically meaningful kinematics by significantly reducing kinematic crosstalk errors and is the more suitable coordinate system for quantifying tibiofemoral motions.

A Cadaveric Comparison of the Kinematic and Anatomical Axes and Arthrokinematics of the Metatarsosesamoidal and First Metatarsophalangeal Joints

Presently, developments in weightbearing computed tomography and biplanar fluoroscopy technologies offer exciting avenues for investigating normative and pathologic foot function with increasing precision. Still, data quantifying sesamoid bone and proximal phalange motion are currently sparse. To express joint kinematics and compare various clinical cohorts, future studies of first ray motion will necessitate robust coordinate frames that respect the variations in underlying anatomy while also aligning closely with the functional, physiological axes of motion. These activity-dependent functional axes may be represented by a mean helical axis of the joint motion. Our cadaveric study quantified joint kinematics from weightbearing computed tomography scans during simulated toe lift and heel rise tasks. We compared the spatial orientations of the mean finite helical axes of the metatarsosesamoidal and metatarsophalangeal joints to the primary joint axis of two relevant methods for defining metatarsal coordinate frames: inertial axes and fitting of geometric primitives. The resultant kinematics exhibited less crosstalk when using a metatarsal coordinate system based on fitting cylindrical primitives to the bony anatomy compared to using principal component axes. Respective metatarsophalangeal and metatarsosesamoidal arthrokinematic contact paths and instantaneous centers of rotation were similar between activities and agree well with currently published data. This study outlines a methodology for quantitatively assessing the efficacy and utility of various anatomical joint coordinate system definitions. Improvements in our ability to characterize the shape and motion of foot bones in the context of functional tasks will elucidate their biomechanical roles and aid clinicians in refining treatment strategies.

[Evaluation of a Bone Coordinate System Constructed Using MR Image Composing]

PURPOSE

To evaluate the accuracy of a bone coordinate system constructed using MR image composing.

METHOD

A femoral coordinate system constructed using image composing of MR images of a whole bovine femur was evaluated using CT images. The MR images were acquired by moving the table and were processed with 3D distortion correction and composing. To evaluate the reproducibility of the measurements, the same operator repeated the construction of the femoral coordinate system. In addition, distortions in the MR images were evaluated in comparison with those in the CT images.

RESULT

The center position of the femoral coordinate system constructed using the MR image composing was 1.6±0.9 mm on the X-axis, 1.5±0.8 mm on the Y-axis, and 0.2±0.3 mm on the Z-axis, and the rotation of each axis was 1° or less. The distortion of the composed MR image was about 0.3%.

CONCLUSION

The femoral coordinate system constructed using MR image composing had the same accuracy as a system constructed with CT images. The effect of MR image composing on the construction of the femoral coordinate system was small.

Articulation of the femoral condyle during knee flexion

Femoral condyle motion of the knee is generally reported using a morphological trans-epicondyle axis (TEA) or geometric center axis (GCA) in the investigation of the knee kinematics. Axial rotation of the femur is recognized as a characteristic motion of the knee during flexion, but is controversial in the literature. This study investigated the biomechanical factors that could be associated to the axial rotations of the femur using both physiological and morphological measurement methods. Twenty healthy knees were investigated during a weightbearing flexion from 0° to 120° at a 15° increment using an imaging technique. A 3D model was constructed for each knee using MR images. Tibiofemoral cartilage contact points were determined at each flexion position to represent physiological knee motion. The contact distance on each condyle was measured between consecutive contact points. The TEA and GCA were used to measure morphological anteroposterior translations of the femoral condyles. The differences between the medial and lateral condyle motions were used to calculate the physiological and morphological axial rotations of the femur. Both the physiological and morphological methods measured external rotations of the femur at low flexion range (0°-45°) and minimal rotations at higher flexion angles. However, the morphological method measured larger posterior translations of the lateral femoral condyle than the medial condyle (p < 0.05), implying a medial pivoting rotation; in contrast, the physiological method measured larger contact distances on the medial condyle than on the lateral condyle (p < 0.05), implying a lateral pivoting rotation. These data could provide useful references for future investigation of kinematics of the knee before and after surgical repair, such as using total knee arthroplasty.

In-vitro validation of inertial-sensor-to-bone alignment

A major shortcoming in kinematic estimation using skin-attached inertial sensors is the alignment of sensor-embedded and segment-embedded coordinate systems. Only a correct alignment results in clinically relevant kinematics. Model-based inertial-sensor-to-bone alignment methods relate inertial sensor measurements with a model of the joint. Therefore, they do not rely on properly executed calibration movements or a correct sensor placement. However, it is unknown how accurate such model-based methods align the sensor axes and the underlying segment-embedded axes, as defined by clinical definitions. Also, validation of the alignment models is challenging, since an optical motion capture ground truth can be prone to disturbances from soft tissue movement, orientation estimation and manual palpation errors. We present an anatomical tibiofemoral ground truth on an unloaded cadaveric measurement set-up that intrinsically overcomes these disturbances. Additionally, we validate existing model-based alignment strategies. Modeling the degrees of freedom leads to the identification of rotation axes. However, there is no reason why these axes would align with the segment-embedded axes. Relative inertial-sensor orientation information and rich arbitrary movements showed to aid in identifying the underlying joint axes. The first dominant sagittal rotation axis aligned sufficiently well with the underlying segment-embedded reference. The estimated axes that relate to secondary kinematics tend to deviate from the underlying segment-embedded axes as much as their expected range of motion around the axes. In order to interpret the secondary kinematics, the alignment model should more closely match the biomechanics of the joint.

Reference in-vitro dataset for inertial-sensor-to-bone alignment applied to the tibiofemoral joint

Skin-attached inertial sensors are increasingly used for kinematic analysis. However, their ability to measure outside-lab can only be exploited after correctly aligning the sensor axes with the underlying anatomical axes. Emerging model-based inertial-sensor-to-bone alignment methods relate inertial measurements with a model of the joint to overcome calibration movements and sensor placement assumptions. It is unclear how good such alignment methods can identify the anatomical axes. Any misalignment results in kinematic cross-talk errors, which makes model validation and the interpretation of the resulting kinematics measurements challenging. This study provides an anatomically correct ground-truth reference dataset from dynamic motions on a cadaver. In contrast with existing references, this enables a true model evaluation that overcomes influences from soft-tissue artifacts, orientation and manual palpation errors. This dataset comprises extensive dynamic movements that are recorded with multimodal measurements including trajectories of optical and virtual (via computed tomography) anatomical markers, reference kinematics, inertial measurements, transformation matrices and visualization tools. The dataset can be used either as a ground-truth reference or to advance research in inertial-sensor-to-bone-alignment.

Physiological articular contact kinematics and morphological femoral condyle translations of the tibiofemoral joint

The changes of tibiofemoral articular cartilage contact locations during knee activities represent a physiological functional characteristic of the knee. However, most studies reported relative motions of the tibia and femur using morphological flexion axes. Few data have been reported on comparisons of morphological femoral condyle motions and physiological tibiofemoral cartilage contact location changes. This study compared the morphological and physiological kinematic measures of 20 knees during an in vivo weightbearing single leg lunge from full extension to 120° of flexion using a combined MRI and dual fluoroscopic imaging system (DFIS) technique. The morphological femoral condyle motion was measured using three flexion axes: trans-epicondylar axis (TEA), geometric center axis (GCA) and iso-height axis (IHA). At low flexion angles, the medial femoral condyle moved anteriorly, opposite to that of the contact points, and was accompanied with a sharp increase in external femoral condyle rotation. At 120° of flexion, the morphological measures of the lateral femoral condyle were more posteriorly positioned than those of the contact locations. The data showed that the morphological measures of femoral condyle translations and axial rotations varied with different flexion axes and did not represent the physiological articular contact kinematics. Biomechanical evaluations of the knee joint motion should include both morphological and physiological kinematics data to accurately demonstrate the functionality of the knee.