Computational evaluation of psoas muscle influence on walking function following internal hemipelvectomy with reconstruction.
computational modeling
internal hemipelvectomy surgery
neuromusculoskeletal modeling
optimal control
orthopedic biomechanics
pelvic sarcoma
predictive simulation
treatment optimization
Journal
Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology
ISSN: 2296-4185
Titre abrégé: Front Bioeng Biotechnol
Pays: Switzerland
ID NLM: 101632513
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
2022
2022
Historique:
received:
16
01
2022
accepted:
01
09
2022
entrez:
17
10
2022
pubmed:
18
10
2022
medline:
18
10
2022
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
An emerging option for internal hemipelvectomy surgery is custom prosthesis reconstruction. This option typically recapitulates the resected pelvic bony anatomy with the goal of maximizing post-surgery walking function while minimizing recovery time. However, the current custom prosthesis design process does not account for the patient's post-surgery prosthesis and bone loading patterns, nor can it predict how different surgical or rehabilitation decisions (e.g., retention or removal of the psoas muscle, strengthening the psoas) will affect prosthesis durability and post-surgery walking function. These factors may contribute to the high observed failure rate for custom pelvic prostheses, discouraging orthopedic oncologists from pursuing this valuable treatment option. One possibility for addressing this problem is to simulate the complex interaction between surgical and rehabilitation decisions, post-surgery walking function, and custom pelvic prosthesis design using patient-specific neuromusculoskeletal models. As a first step toward developing this capability, this study used a personalized neuromusculoskeletal model and direct collocation optimal control to predict the impact of ipsilateral psoas muscle strength on walking function following internal hemipelvectomy with custom prosthesis reconstruction. The influence of the psoas muscle was targeted since retention of this important muscle can be surgically demanding for certain tumors, requiring additional time in the operating room. The post-surgery walking predictions emulated the most common surgical scenario encountered at MD Anderson Cancer Center in Houston. Simulated post-surgery psoas strengths included 0% (removed), 50% (weakened), 100% (maintained), and 150% (strengthened) of the pre-surgery value. However, only the 100% and 150% cases successfully converged to a complete gait cycle. When post-surgery psoas strength was maintained, clinical gait features were predicted, including increased stance width, decreased stride length, and increased lumbar bending towards the operated side. Furthermore, when post-surgery psoas strength was increased, stance width and stride length returned to pre-surgery values. These results suggest that retention and strengthening of the psoas muscle on the operated side may be important for maximizing post-surgery walking function. If future studies can validate this computational approach using post-surgery experimental walking data, the approach may eventually influence surgical, rehabilitation, and custom prosthesis design decisions to meet the unique clinical needs of pelvic sarcoma patients.
Identifiants
pubmed: 36246391
doi: 10.3389/fbioe.2022.855870
pii: 855870
pmc: PMC9559731
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
855870Subventions
Organisme : RRD VA
ID : IK6 RX003543
Pays : United States
Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2022 Vega, Li, Shourijeh, Ao, Weinschenk, Patten, Font-Llagunes, Lewis and Fregly.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.
Références
J Biomech. 2005 Mar;38(3):621-6
pubmed: 15652563
PLoS One. 2017 Jul 11;12(7):e0179698
pubmed: 28700708
J Biomech. 2012 Feb 2;45(3):595-601
pubmed: 22176708
J Arthroplasty. 2011 Dec;26(8):1508-13
pubmed: 21477973
Front Hum Neurosci. 2020 Feb 18;14:40
pubmed: 32132911
Med Eng Phys. 2021 Oct;96:1-12
pubmed: 34565547
Front Bioeng Biotechnol. 2016 Oct 13;4:77
pubmed: 27790612
J Physiol. 2004 Apr 1;556(Pt 1):267-82
pubmed: 14724214
Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2005 Sep;438:30-5
pubmed: 16131866
J Biomech Eng. 2015 Aug;137(8):081003
pubmed: 25901907
Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2005 Sep;438:36-41
pubmed: 16131867
J R Soc Interface. 2019 Aug 30;16(157):20190402
pubmed: 31431186
J Biomech. 1994 Dec;27(12):1477-88
pubmed: 7806555
J Biomech. 2005 Nov;38(11):2181-9
pubmed: 16154404
J Biomech. 2014 Feb 07;47(3):631-8
pubmed: 24368144
J Biomech. 2010 Apr 19;43(6):1055-60
pubmed: 20074736
Med Eng Phys. 2008 May;30(4):434-43
pubmed: 17616425
J Biomech Eng. 2016 Sep 1;138(9):
pubmed: 27379886
IEEE Trans Biomed Eng. 2016 Oct;63(10):2068-79
pubmed: 27392337
J Biomech. 2004 Sep;37(9):1447-53
pubmed: 15275854
Front Comput Neurosci. 2020 Dec 04;14:588943
pubmed: 33343322
J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2007 May-Jun;16(3 Suppl):S9-S12
pubmed: 16990024
Front Bioeng Biotechnol. 2022 Sep 07;10:962959
pubmed: 36159690
J Biomech. 2004 Jan;37(1):81-8
pubmed: 14672571
Front Neurorobot. 2019 Oct 01;13:80
pubmed: 31632261
IEEE Trans Biomed Eng. 2007 Sep;54(9):1687-95
pubmed: 17867361
J Electromyogr Kinesiol. 2011 Feb;21(1):1-12
pubmed: 20869882
Procedia IUTAM. 2011 Jan 1;2(2011):297-316
pubmed: 22102983
J Biomech Eng. 2020 Jan 1;142(1):
pubmed: 31343670
Bone Joint J. 2020 Jun;102-B(6):779-787
pubmed: 32475244
Front Neurorobot. 2019 Jul 17;13:54
pubmed: 31379550
J Int Med Res. 2020 Apr;48(4):300060520917275
pubmed: 32290744
J Biomech. 2018 May 17;73:108-118
pubmed: 29673935
Comput Methods Programs Biomed. 2017 Dec;152:85-92
pubmed: 29054263
Front Bioeng Biotechnol. 2020 Nov 26;8:588925
pubmed: 33324623
Disabil Rehabil. 2019 Aug;41(17):2066-2070
pubmed: 29587549