Validation of a Biomechanical Injury and Disease Assessment Platform Applying an Inertial-Based Biosensor and Axis Vector Computation.

Inertial kinetics and kinematics have substantial influences on human biomechanical function. A new algorithm for Inertial Measurement Unit (IMU)-based motion tracking is presented in this work. The primary aims of this paper are to combine recent developments in improved biosensor technology with mainstream motion-tracking hardware to measure the overall performance of human movement based on joint axis-angle representations of limb rotation. This work describes an alternative approach to representing three-dimensional rotations using a normalized vector around which an identified joint angle defines the overall rotation, rather than a traditional Euler angle approach. Furthermore, IMUs allow for the direct measurement of joint angular velocities, offering the opportunity to increase the accuracy of instantaneous axis of rotation estimations. Although the axis-angle representation requires vector quotient algebra (quaternions) to define rotation, this approach may be preferred for many graphics, vision, and virtual reality software applications. The analytical method was validated with laboratory data gathered from an infant dummy leg's flexion and extension knee movements and applied to a living subject's upper limb movement. The results showed that the novel approach could reasonably handle a simple case and provide a detailed analysis of axis-angle migration. The described algorithm could play a notable role in the biomechanical analysis of human joints and offers a harbinger of IMU-based biosensors that may detect pathological patterns of joint disease and injury.

Effect of non-specific neck pain on the path of the instantaneous axis of rotation of the neck during its flexion-extension movement.

Non-specific neck pain is a common musculoskeletal disorder with a high prevalence and involves impaired joint movement pattern. Therefore, this study aimed to compare the trajectory of the instantaneous axis of rotation(IAR) in flexion-extension movements of the neck between people with and without nonspecific neck pain, using functional data analysis techniques. Furthermore, possible relationships between neck kinematics and perceived pain and disability were explored. Seventy-three volunteers participated in this cross-sectional study. They were allocated in a non-specific pain group (PG, n = 28) and a control group (CG, n = 45). A cyclic flexion-extension movement was assessed by a video photogrammetry system and numerical and functional variables were computed to analyze IAR trajectory during movement. Moreover, to explore possible relationships of these variables with pain and neck disability, a visual analogue scale (VAS) and the neck disability index (NDI) were used. The instantaneous axis of rotation trajectory during the flexion-extension cyclic movement described a path like Greek letter rho both in the CG and the PG, but this trajectory was shorter and displaced upward in the PG, compared to the CG. A reduction of the displacement range and a rise in the vertical position of the IAR were related to VAS and NDI scores. Non-specific neck pain is associated with a higher location of the instantaneous axis of rotation and a decrease in length of the path traveled during the flexion-extension movement. This study contributes to a better description of neck movement in people with non-specific neck pain, which would help to plan an individualized treatment.

Sequential damage assessment of the posterolateral complex of the knee joint: a finite element study.

BACKGROUND: The posterolateral complex (PLC), which consists of the popliteus tendon (PT), lateral collateral ligament (LCL), and popliteofibular ligament (PFL), is an indispensable structure of the knee joint. The aim of this study was to explore the functionality of the PLC by determining the specific role of each component in maintaining posterolateral knee stability. METHODS: A finite element (FE) model was generated based on previous material property data and magnetic resonance imaging of a volunteer's knee joint. The injury order of the PLC was set as LCL, PFL, and PT. A combined compressive load of 1150 N and an anterior tibial load of 134 N was applied to the tibia to investigate tibial displacement (TD). Tibial external rotation (TER) and tibial varus angulation (TVA) were measured under bending motions of 5 and 10 Nm. The instantaneous axis of rotation (IAR) of the knee joint under different rotation motions was also recorded. RESULTS: The TD of the intact knee under a combined compressive load of 1150 N and an anterior tibial load of 134 N matched the values determined in previous studies. Our model showed consistent increases in TD, TVA, and TER after sequential damage of the PLC. In addition, sequential disruption caused the IAR to shift superiorly and laterally during varus rotation and medially and anteriorly during external rotation. In the dynamic damage of the PLC, LCL injury had the largest effect on TD, TVA, TER, and IAR. CONCLUSIONS: Sequential injury of the PLC caused considerable loss of stability of the knee joint according to an FE model. The most significant structure of the PLC was the LCL.

The Differences Among Kinematic Parameters for Evaluating the Quality of Intervertebral Motion of the Cervical Spine in Clinical and Experimental Studies: Concepts, Research and Measurement Techniques. A Literature Review.

BACKGROUND: The center of rotation (COR), instantaneous center of rotation (ICR), instantaneous axis of rotation, instantaneous helical axis, finite helical axis, and helical axis of motion are important kinematic parameters for evaluating the quality of intervertebral motion of the cervical spine (QIMC). These parameters embody different concepts and are calculated using various methods. In this review, the distinctions and connections between these kinematic parameters are analyzed according to the concepts, research, and measurement techniques to provide a theoretic basis for future research and new research directions. METHODS: The PubMed/MEDLINE databases were searched for studies published in English related to the concepts, research, and calculation of these parameters. The included studies were classified according to the different research or calculation methods, and the proportion of each study type was calculated and analyzed. RESULTS: Forty articles were selected. The methods for analyzing the QIMC include in vivo and in vitro studies and finite element analysis. The primary methods for calculating these parameters include the method of perpendicular bisectors and the finite helical axis method. CONCLUSIONS: COR was the simplest but not the most accurate parameter to evaluate the QIMC. Conversely, instantaneous helical axis/helical axis of motion were the most accurate, but relatively complex parameters to evaluate the QIMC. ICR showed dynamic changes during flexion-extension motion, but not the three-dimensional kinematic motion of the cervical spine. These parameters were equivalent only in certain situations but cannot be substituted for each other in the clinic. A dynamic radiographic in vivo study was the most convenient and frequently used research method to calculate COR, but failed to describe the dynamic movement. The method of perpendicular bisectors was widely used to calculate the COR or ICR. Therefore, a combination of new research and calculation methods to simply and effectively evaluate the QIMC requires further investigation.

Adjacent segment motion following multi-level ACDF: a kinematic and clinical study in patients with zero-profile anchored spacer or plate.

PURPOSE: To investigate the adjacent segment kinematics, including the instantaneous axis of rotation (IAR) and range of motion (ROM), after anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF), and to compare between ACDF with zero-profile anchored spacer (ACDF-Z) and ACDF with plate (ACDF-P). METHODS: Eighty-seven patients (ACDF-Z = 63; ACDF-P = 24) were included. Flexion, extension and neutral cervical radiographs were obtained before operation and at 1-year follow-up. C2-C7 ROM, adjacent segment ROMs, and IARs were measured. Clinical evaluation was based on the Visual Analogue Scale, Neck Disability Index, and Japanese Orthopaedic Association score. RESULTS: After ACDF-Z, location of the superior IAR-AP reduced 1.60 mm, which represents 8% of the vertebral body (P < 0.001), and location of the inferior IAR-SI reduced 2.19 mm, 17% of the vertebral body (P = 0.02). After ACDF-P, location of the superior IAR-AP increased 0.8 mm, which means 6% of the vertebral body (P = 0.008), location of the inferior IAR-AP increased 3.34 mm, 22% of the vertebral body (P = 0.03), and location of the inferior IAR-SI reduced 3.14 mm, 25% of the vertebral body (P = 0.002). C2-C7 ROM significantly decreased after both ACDF-Z and ACDF-P (P < 0.001). Neither ACDF-Z nor ACDF-P significantly affected the adjacent segment ROMs (P > 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Both ACDF-Z and ACDF-P significantly impacted cervical kinematics, although both procedures obtained satisfactory clinical results in the treatment of cervical spondylosis. After both ACDF-Z and ACDF-P, C2-C7 ROM decreased significantly, while adjacent segment ROMs were preserved. ACDF-Z and ACDF-P impact the location of adjacent segment IAR-SI in similar way, while impact the location of adjacent segment IAR-AP in diverse ways. These slides can be retrieved under Electronic Supplementary Material.

Clinical Relevance of Cervical Kinematic Quality Parameters in Planar Movement.

Comprehending cervical spinal motion underlies the understanding of the mechanisms of cervical disorders. We aimed to better define the clinical relevance of cervical spine kinematics, focusing on quality parameters describing cervical spine planar motion. The most common study focuses were kinematic quality parameters after cervical arthroplasty and in normal subjects, patients with cervical degeneration, and patients with cervical deformities. Kinematic quality parameters are important for cervical degeneration prevention, being detected sooner than differences on imaging examinations and being significantly related to the degree of cervical degeneration. Kinematic quality parameters are effective for evaluating the changes of cervical motion pattern after cervical fusion and non-fusion, assessing operative and adjacent segments in the early stages, and predicting adjacent segment degeneration. However, owing to current research limitations, and controversy about the changes of kinematic quality parameters after different surgical procedures, current assessments are limited to cervical spine flexion and extension. Different osteotomy methods of cervical deformity have different effects on cervical motion patterns and quality parameters. Choosing the most effective surgical method remains a challenge and kinematic quality parameters in cervical deformity are important future research topics. This review highlights the instantaneous center of rotation, the center of rotation, and the instantaneous axis of rotation as being important kinematic quality parameters of cervical spinal motion. These can be used to detect abnormal cervical mobility, to diagnose cervical degeneration, to design disc protheses, and to evaluate surgical effects earlier than other methods. Owing to limitations of research methods there is variation in the way parameters are defined by various researchers. No uniform standard exists for defining degenerative motion quality parameters in normal asymptomatic, degenerative, and postoperative patients. Therefore, further study is required. New study techniques and defining kinematic quality parameters in normal subjects will clarify the definitions of these parameters, enhancing their future clinical usefulness.

Biomechanical evaluation of the ProDisc-C stability following graded posterior cervical injury.

OBJECTIVEThere are limited data regarding the implications of revision posterior surgery in the setting of previous cervical arthroplasty (CA). The purpose of this study was to analyze segmental biomechanics in human cadaveric specimens with and without CA, in the context of graded posterior resection.METHODSFourteen human cadaveric cervical spines (C3-T1 or C2-7) were divided into arthroplasty (ProDisc-C, n = 7) and control (intact disc, n = 7) groups. Both groups underwent sequential posterior element resections: unilateral foraminotomy, laminoplasty, and finally laminectomy. Specimens were studied sequentially in two different loading apparatuses during the induction of flexion-extension, lateral bending, and axial rotation.RESULTSRange of motion (ROM) after artificial disc insertion was reduced relative to that in the control group during axial rotation and lateral bending (13% and 28%, respectively; p < 0.05) but was similar during flexion and extension. With sequential resections, ROM increased by a similar magnitude following foraminotomy and laminoplasty in both groups. Laminectomy had a much greater effect: mean (aggregate) ROM during flexion-extension, lateral bending, and axial rotation was increased by a magnitude of 52% following laminectomy in the setting of CA, compared to an 8% increase without arthroplasty. In particular, laminectomy in the setting of CA introduced significant instability in flexion-extension, characterized by a 90% increase in ROM from laminoplasty to laminectomy, compared to a 16% increase in ROM from laminoplasty to laminectomy without arthroplasty (p < 0.05).CONCLUSIONSForaminotomy and laminoplasty did not result in significant instability in the setting of CA, compared to controls. Laminectomy alone, however, resulted in a significant change in biomechanics, allowing for significantly increased flexion and extension. Laminectomy alone should be used with caution in the setting of previous CA.

Trajectory of instantaneous axis of rotation in fixed lumbar spine with instrumentation.

BACKGROUND: Several studies showed instantaneous axis of rotation (IAR) in the intact spine. However, there has been no report on the trajectory of the IAR of a damaged spine or that of a fixed spine with instrumentation. It is the aim of this study to investigate the trajectory of the IAR of the lumbar spine using the vertebra of deer. METHODS: Functional spinal units (L5-6) from five deer were evaluated with six-axis material testing machine. As specimen models, we prepared a normal model, a damaged model, and a pedicle screw (PS) model. We measured the IAR during bending in the coronal and sagittal planes and axial rotation. In the bending test, four directions were measured: anterior, posterior, right, and left. In the rotation test, two directions were measured: right and left. RESULTS: The IAR of the normal model during bending moved in the bending direction. The IAR of the damaged model during bending moved in the bending direction, but the magnitude of displacement was bigger compared to that of the normal model. In the PS model, the IAR during bending test hardly moved. During rotation test, the IAR of the normal model and PS model located in the spinal canal, but the IAR of the damaged model located in the posterior part of the vertebral body. CONCLUSIONS: In this study, the IAR of damaged model was scattering and that of PS model was concentrating. This suggests that higher mechanical load applied to the dura tube and nerve roots in the damaged model and less mechanical load applied to that in the PS model.

Sagittal plane lumbar intervertebral motion during seated flexion-extension radiographs of 658 asymptomatic nondegenerated levels.

OBJECT: Evaluation of lumbar stability is fundamentally dependent on a clear understanding of normal lumbar motion. There are inconsistencies in reported lumbar motion across previously published studies, and it is unclear which provide the most reliable reference data. New technology now allows valid and reliable determination of normal lumbar intervertebral motion (IVM). The object of this study was to provide normative reference data for lumbar IVM and center of rotation (COR) using validated computer-assisted measurement tools. METHODS: Sitting flexion-extension radiographs were obtained in 162 asymptomatic volunteers and then analyzed using a previously validated and widely used computerized image analysis method. Each lumbar level was subsequently classified as "degenerated" or "nondegenerated" using the Kellgren-Lawrence classification. Of the 803 levels analyzed, 658 were nondegenerated (Kellgren-Lawrence grade < 2). At each level of the lumbar spine, the magnitude of intervertebral rotation and translation, the ratio of translation per degree of rotation (TPDR), and the position of the COR were calculated in the nondegenerative cohort. Translations were calculated in millimeters and percentage endplate width. RESULTS: All parameters were significantly dependent on the intervertebral level. The upper limit of the 95% CIs for anteroposterior intervertebral translation in this asymptomatic cohort ranged from 2.1 mm (6.2% endplate width) to 4.6 mm (13.3% endplate width). Intervertebral rotation upper limits ranged from 16.3° to 23.5°. The upper limits for TPDR ranged from 0.49% to 0.82% endplate width/degree. The COR coordinates were clustered in level-dependent patterns. CONCLUSIONS: New normal values for IVM, COR, and the ratio of TPDR in asymptomatic nondegenerative lumbar levels are proposed, providing a reference for future interpretation of sagittal plane motion in the lumbar spine.