The effect of modelling parameters in the development and validation of knee joint models on ligament mechanics: A systematic review.


Journal

PloS one
ISSN: 1932-6203
Titre abrégé: PLoS One
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101285081

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
2022
Historique:
received: 18 10 2021
accepted: 30 12 2021
entrez: 27 1 2022
pubmed: 28 1 2022
medline: 19 2 2022
Statut: epublish

Résumé

The ligaments in the knee are prone to injury especially during dynamic activities. The resulting instability can have a profound impact on a patient's daily activities and functional capacity. Musculoskeletal knee modelling provides a non-invasive tool for investigating ligament force-strain behaviour in various dynamic scenarios, as well as potentially complementing existing pre-planning tools to optimise surgical reconstructions. However, despite the development and validation of many musculoskeletal knee models, the effect of modelling parameters on ligament mechanics has not yet been systematically reviewed. This systematic review aimed to investigate the results of the most recent studies using musculoskeletal modelling techniques to create models of the native knee joint, focusing on ligament mechanics and modelling parameters in various simulated movements. PubMed, ScienceDirect, Google Scholar, and IEEE Xplore. Databases were searched for articles containing any numerical ligament strain or force data on the intact, ACL-deficient, PCL-deficient, or lateral extra-articular reconstructed (LER) knee joints. The studies had to derive these results from musculoskeletal modelling methods. The dates of the publications were between 1 January 1995 and 30 November 2021. A customised data extraction form was created to extract each selected study's critical musculoskeletal model development parameters. Specific parameters of the musculoskeletal knee model development used in each eligible study were independently extracted, including the (1) musculoskeletal model definition (i.e., software used for modelling, knee type, source of geometry, the inclusion of cartilage and menisci, and articulating joints and joint boundary conditions (i.e., number of degrees of freedom (DoF), subjects, type of activity, collected data and type of simulation)), (2) specifically ligaments modelling techniques (i.e., ligament bundles, attachment points, pathway, wrapping surfaces and ligament material properties such as stiffness and reference length), (3) sensitivity analysis, (4) validation approaches, (5) predicted ligament mechanics (i.e., force, length or strain) and (6) clinical applications if available. The eligible papers were then discussed quantitatively and qualitatively with respect to the above parameters. From the 1004 articles retrieved by the initial electronic search, only 25 met all inclusion criteria. The results obtained by aggregating data reported in the eligible studies indicate that considerable variability in the predicted ligament mechanics is caused by differences in geometry, boundary conditions and ligament modelling parameters. This systematic review revealed that there is currently a lack of consensus on knee ligament mechanics. Despite this lack of consensus, some papers highlight the potential of developing translational tools using musculoskeletal modelling. Greater consistency in model design, incorporation of sensitivity assessment of the model outcomes and more rigorous validation methods should lead to better agreement in predictions for ligament mechanics between studies. The resulting confidence in the musculoskeletal model outputs may lead to the development of clinical tools that could be used for patient-specific treatments.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND
The ligaments in the knee are prone to injury especially during dynamic activities. The resulting instability can have a profound impact on a patient's daily activities and functional capacity. Musculoskeletal knee modelling provides a non-invasive tool for investigating ligament force-strain behaviour in various dynamic scenarios, as well as potentially complementing existing pre-planning tools to optimise surgical reconstructions. However, despite the development and validation of many musculoskeletal knee models, the effect of modelling parameters on ligament mechanics has not yet been systematically reviewed.
OBJECTIVES
This systematic review aimed to investigate the results of the most recent studies using musculoskeletal modelling techniques to create models of the native knee joint, focusing on ligament mechanics and modelling parameters in various simulated movements.
DATA SOURCES
PubMed, ScienceDirect, Google Scholar, and IEEE Xplore.
ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR SELECTING STUDIES
Databases were searched for articles containing any numerical ligament strain or force data on the intact, ACL-deficient, PCL-deficient, or lateral extra-articular reconstructed (LER) knee joints. The studies had to derive these results from musculoskeletal modelling methods. The dates of the publications were between 1 January 1995 and 30 November 2021.
METHOD
A customised data extraction form was created to extract each selected study's critical musculoskeletal model development parameters. Specific parameters of the musculoskeletal knee model development used in each eligible study were independently extracted, including the (1) musculoskeletal model definition (i.e., software used for modelling, knee type, source of geometry, the inclusion of cartilage and menisci, and articulating joints and joint boundary conditions (i.e., number of degrees of freedom (DoF), subjects, type of activity, collected data and type of simulation)), (2) specifically ligaments modelling techniques (i.e., ligament bundles, attachment points, pathway, wrapping surfaces and ligament material properties such as stiffness and reference length), (3) sensitivity analysis, (4) validation approaches, (5) predicted ligament mechanics (i.e., force, length or strain) and (6) clinical applications if available. The eligible papers were then discussed quantitatively and qualitatively with respect to the above parameters.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
From the 1004 articles retrieved by the initial electronic search, only 25 met all inclusion criteria. The results obtained by aggregating data reported in the eligible studies indicate that considerable variability in the predicted ligament mechanics is caused by differences in geometry, boundary conditions and ligament modelling parameters.
CONCLUSION
This systematic review revealed that there is currently a lack of consensus on knee ligament mechanics. Despite this lack of consensus, some papers highlight the potential of developing translational tools using musculoskeletal modelling. Greater consistency in model design, incorporation of sensitivity assessment of the model outcomes and more rigorous validation methods should lead to better agreement in predictions for ligament mechanics between studies. The resulting confidence in the musculoskeletal model outputs may lead to the development of clinical tools that could be used for patient-specific treatments.

Identifiants

pubmed: 35085320
doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0262684
pii: PONE-D-21-33169
pmc: PMC8794118
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't Systematic Review

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

e0262684

Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts

The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

Références

Ann Biomed Eng. 2004 Aug;32(8):1161-74
pubmed: 15446512
Bone Joint Res. 2017 Jan;6(1):31-42
pubmed: 28077395
Comput Methods Programs Biomed. 2020 Feb;184:105098
pubmed: 31698195
Comput Methods Biomech Biomed Engin. 2015 Aug;18(11):1217-1224
pubmed: 24611807
Comput Math Methods Med. 2013;2013:718423
pubmed: 23509602
Technol Health Care. 2015;23(4):485-94
pubmed: 26409911
Comput Methods Biomech Biomed Engin. 2002 Apr;5(2):149-59
pubmed: 12186724
J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1976 Jul;58(5):599-604
pubmed: 946970
IEEE Trans Biomed Eng. 2007 Nov;54(11):1940-50
pubmed: 18018689
J Knee Surg. 2016 Feb;29(2):99-106
pubmed: 26408997
J Orthop Res. 2011 Feb;29(2):223-31
pubmed: 20857489
J Biomech. 1997 Feb;30(2):163-76
pubmed: 9001937
Comput Biol Med. 2019 Jul;110:186-195
pubmed: 31173942
PLoS Med. 2009 Jul 21;6(7):e1000097
pubmed: 19621072
Open Biomed Eng J. 2012;6:23-32
pubmed: 22470411
Comput Methods Biomech Biomed Engin. 2016;19(5):571-9
pubmed: 26057607
J Biomech. 2006;39(9):1686-701
pubmed: 15993414
Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon). 2019 Jan;61:58-63
pubmed: 30481677
Gait Posture. 2010 Jan;31(1):1-8
pubmed: 19853455
Front Bioeng Biotechnol. 2020 Oct 15;8:558815
pubmed: 33178671
J Orthop. 2020 Aug 06;21:370-374
pubmed: 32904327
J Biomech. 2012 Feb 2;45(3):579-87
pubmed: 22137088
J Orthop Res. 2006 Oct;24(10):1983-90
pubmed: 16900540
Ann Biomed Eng. 2011 Jan;39(1):110-21
pubmed: 20683675
Ann Biomed Eng. 2012 Aug;40(8):1679-91
pubmed: 22527014
J Biomech Eng. 2015 Feb 1;137(2):020905
pubmed: 25474098
R Soc Open Sci. 2017 Aug 9;4(8):170670
pubmed: 28879008
J Biomech. 2007;40 Suppl 1:S38-44
pubmed: 17434519
Knee. 2011 Jan;18(1):34-41
pubmed: 20116260
J Biomech. 1991;24(11):1019-31
pubmed: 1761580
J Biomech. 2004 Mar;37(3):313-9
pubmed: 14757450
Knee. 2021 Aug;31:118-126
pubmed: 34134079
IEEE Trans Biomed Eng. 2016 Oct;63(10):2068-79
pubmed: 27392337
J Biomech Eng. 2021 Mar 1;143(3):
pubmed: 33030199
Med Eng Phys. 2019 Apr;66:47-55
pubmed: 30850334
J Biomech Eng. 1991 Aug;113(3):263-9
pubmed: 1921352
J Biomech. 1980;13(8):677-85
pubmed: 7419534
Biomech Model Mechanobiol. 2021 Aug;20(4):1533-1546
pubmed: 33880694
J Biomech Eng. 2009 Mar;131(3):031005
pubmed: 19154064
Med Biol Eng Comput. 2015 Jul;53(7):655-67
pubmed: 25783762
J Biomech. 2016 Jan 25;49(2):185-92
pubmed: 26708962
J Biomech. 2016 Dec 8;49(16):3891-3900
pubmed: 27825602
Muscles Ligaments Tendons J. 2018 Apr 16;7(4):546-557
pubmed: 29721456
Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon). 2007 Feb;22(2):239-47
pubmed: 17134801
PLoS Med. 2014 Oct 14;11(10):e1001744
pubmed: 25314315
Arthroscopy. 2003 Sep;19(7):700-5
pubmed: 12966376
Comput Methods Biomech Biomed Engin. 2020 Mar;23(4):143-154
pubmed: 31928215
Proc Inst Mech Eng H. 2018 May;232(5):508-519
pubmed: 29637803
Biomed Eng Online. 2018 Apr 17;17(1):42
pubmed: 29665801
Knee. 2018 Dec;25(6):1009-1015
pubmed: 30121150
Am J Sports Med. 2020 Dec;48(14):3503-3514
pubmed: 33175559
Osteoarthritis Cartilage. 2009 Jul;17(7):883-90
pubmed: 19246217
IEEE Trans Biomed Eng. 2016 Oct;63(10):2056-67
pubmed: 27362757
Comput Methods Biomech Biomed Engin. 2012;15(7):745-51
pubmed: 21491263
Comput Methods Biomech Biomed Engin. 1998;1(4):265-283
pubmed: 11264809
Curr Rev Musculoskelet Med. 2016 Jun;9(2):114-22
pubmed: 27007474
J Biomech. 2004 Jun;37(6):797-805
pubmed: 15111067
West J Med. 2001 Apr;174(4):266-72
pubmed: 11290686
Knee. 2019 Aug;26(4):813-823
pubmed: 31255528
J Orthop Res. 2012 Apr;30(4):503-13
pubmed: 22161745
J Orthop Res. 1997 Mar;15(2):278-84
pubmed: 9167632
J Biomech Eng. 2006 Feb;128(1):115-23
pubmed: 16532624
Orthop Traumatol Surg Res. 2019 Jun;105(4):661-667
pubmed: 31005698
Med Eng Phys. 2017 Jan;39:113-116
pubmed: 27814954
J Athl Train. 1993 Spring;28(1):10-20
pubmed: 16558197
Motor Control. 2000 Jul;4(3):273-92
pubmed: 10900056
J Hum Kinet. 2016 Jul 2;51:37-43
pubmed: 28149366
J Biomech Eng. 1983 May;105(2):136-44
pubmed: 6865355
Gait Posture. 2009 Aug;30(2):173-80
pubmed: 19473844
J Biomech. 2019 Jan 23;83:9-15
pubmed: 30527390
Med Eng Phys. 2019 Dec;74:1-12
pubmed: 31492543
J Biomech Eng. 2016 May;138(5):051010
pubmed: 26926010
J Biomech. 2019 Aug 27;93:194-203
pubmed: 31331662
Biomed Eng Online. 2017 Aug 18;16(1):106
pubmed: 28821242
Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon). 2005 Jun;20(5):451-4
pubmed: 15836931
PeerJ. 2018 Jan 25;6:e4298
pubmed: 29379690
J Biomech. 1988;21(9):705-20
pubmed: 3182875

Auteurs

Sara Sadat Farshidfar (SS)

Macquarie Medical School, Faculty of Medicine, Health and Human Sciences, Macquarie University, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.

Joseph Cadman (J)

Macquarie Medical School, Faculty of Medicine, Health and Human Sciences, Macquarie University, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.

Danny Deng (D)

Sydney Medical School, Faculty of Medicine and Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.

Richard Appleyard (R)

Macquarie Medical School, Faculty of Medicine, Health and Human Sciences, Macquarie University, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.

Danè Dabirrahmani (D)

Macquarie Medical School, Faculty of Medicine, Health and Human Sciences, Macquarie University, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.

Articles similaires

[Redispensing of expensive oral anticancer medicines: a practical application].

Lisanne N van Merendonk, Kübra Akgöl, Bastiaan Nuijen
1.00
Humans Antineoplastic Agents Administration, Oral Drug Costs Counterfeit Drugs

Smoking Cessation and Incident Cardiovascular Disease.

Jun Hwan Cho, Seung Yong Shin, Hoseob Kim et al.
1.00
Humans Male Smoking Cessation Cardiovascular Diseases Female
Humans United States Aged Cross-Sectional Studies Medicare Part C
1.00
Humans Yoga Low Back Pain Female Male

Classifications MeSH