William Anderst

Dynamic function of the ACL-reconstructed knee during running.

Little is known about the three-dimensional behavior of the anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstructed knee during dynamic, functional loading, or how dynamic knee function changes over time in the reconstructed knee. We hypothesized dynamic, in vivo function of the ACL-reconstructed knee is different from the contralateral, uninjured knee and changes over time. We measured knee kinematics for 16 subjects during downhill running 5 and 12 months after ACL reconstruction (bone-patellar tendon-bone or quadrupled hamstring tendon with interference screw fixation) using a 250 frame per second stereoradiographic system. We used repeated-measures ANOVA to ascertain whether there were differences between the uninjured and reconstructed limbs and over time. We found no differences in anterior tibial translation between limbs, but reconstructed knees were more externally rotated and in more adduction (varus) during the stance phase of running. Anterior tibial translation increased from 5 to 12 months after surgery in the reconstructed knees. Anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction failed to restore normal rotational knee kinematics during dynamic, functional loading and some degradation of graft function occurred over time. These abnormal motions may contribute to long-term joint degeneration associated with ACL injury and reconstruction.

The Location of Femoral and Tibial Tunnels in Anatomic Double-Bundle Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction Analyzed by Three-Dimensional Computed Tomography Models

BACKGROUND Characterization of the insertion site anatomy in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction has recently received increased attention in the literature, coinciding with a growing interest in anatomic reconstruction. The purpose of this study was to visualize and quantify the position of anatomic anteromedial and posterolateral bone tunnels in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction with use of novel methods applied to three-dimensional computed tomographic reconstruction images. METHODS Careful arthroscopic dissection and anatomic double-bundle anterior cruciate ligament tunnel drilling were performed with use of topographical landmarks in eight cadaver knees. Computed tomography scans were performed on each knee, and three-dimensional models were created and aligned into an anatomic coordinate system. Tibial tunnel aperture centers were measured in the anterior-to-posterior and medial-to-lateral directions on the tibial plateau. The femoral tunnel aperture centers were measured in anatomic posterior-to-anterior and proximal-to-distal directions and with the quadrant method (relative to the femoral notch). RESULTS The centers of the tunnel apertures for the anteromedial and posterolateral tunnels were located at a mean (and standard deviation) of 25% +/- 2.8% and 46.4% +/- 3.7%, respectively, of the anterior-to-posterior tibial plateau depth and at a mean of 50.5% +/- 4.2% and 52.4% +/- 2.5% of the medial-to-lateral tibial plateau width. On the medial wall of the lateral femoral condyle in the anatomic posterior-to-anterior direction, the anteromedial and posterolateral tunnels were located at 23.1% +/- 6.1% and 15.3% +/- 4.8%, respectively. The proximal-to-distal locations were at 28.2% +/- 5.4% and 58.1 +/- 7.1%, respectively. With the quadrant method, anteromedial and posterolateral tunnels were measured at 21.7% +/- 2.5% and 35.1% +/- 3.5%, respectively, from the proximal condylar surface (parallel to the Blumensaat line), and at 33.2% +/- 5.6% and 55.3% +/- 5.3% from the notch roof (perpendicular to the Blumensaat line). Intraobserver and interobserver reliability was high, with small standard errors of measurement. CONCLUSIONS This cadaver study provides reference data against which tunnel position in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction can be compared in future clinical trials.

Nonanatomic tunnel position in traditional transtibial single-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction evaluated by three-dimensional computed tomography.

BACKGROUND Transtibial drilling techniques are widely used for arthroscopic reconstruction of the anterior cruciate ligament, most likely because they simplify femoral tunnel placement and reduce surgical time. Recently, however, there has been concern that this technique results in nonanatomically positioned bone tunnels, which may cause abnormal knee function. The purpose of this study was to use three-dimensional computed tomography models to visualize and quantify the positions of femoral and tibial tunnels in patients who underwent traditional transtibial single-bundle reconstruction of the anterior cruciate ligament and to compare these positions with reference data on anatomical tunnel positions. METHODS Computed tomography scans were performed on thirty-two knees that had undergone transtibial single-bundle reconstruction of the anterior cruciate ligament. Three-dimensional computed tomography models were aligned into an anatomical coordinate system. Tibial tunnel aperture centers were measured in the anterior-to-posterior and medial-to-lateral directions on the tibial plateau. Femoral tunnel aperture centers were measured in anatomic posterior-to-anterior and proximal-to-distal directions and with the quadrant method. These measurements were compared with reference data on anatomical tunnel positions. RESULTS Tibial tunnels were located at a mean (and standard deviation) of 48.0% +/- 5.5% of the anterior-to-posterior plateau depth and a mean of 47.8% +/- 2.4% of the medial-to-lateral plateau width. Femoral tunnels were measured at a mean of 54.3% +/- 8.3% in the anatomic posterior-to-anterior direction and at a mean of 41.1% +/- 10.3% in the proximal-to-distal direction. With the quadrant method, femoral tunnels were measured at a mean of 37.2% +/- 5.5% from the proximal condylar surface (parallel to the Blumensaat line) and at a mean of 11.3% +/- 6.6% from the notch roof (perpendicular to the Blumensaat line). Tibial tunnels were positioned medial to the anatomic posterolateral position (p < 0.001). Femoral tunnels were positioned anterior to both anteromedial and posterolateral anatomic tunnel locations (p < 0.001 for both). CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE Transtibial anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction failed to accurately place femoral and tibial tunnels within the native anterior cruciate ligament insertion site. If anatomical graft placement is desired, transtibial techniques should be performed only after careful identification of the native insertions. If anatomical positioning of the femoral tunnel cannot be achieved, then an alternative approach may be indicated.

In vivo measurement of 3-D skeletal kinematics from sequences of biplane radiographs: Application to knee kinematics

Current noninvasive or minimally invasive methods for evaluating in vivo knee kinematics are inadequate for accurate determination of dynamic joint function due to limited accuracy and/or insufficient sampling rates. A three-dimensional (3-D) model-based method is presented to estimate skeletal motion of the knee from high-speed sequences of biplane radiographs. The method implicitly assumes that geometrical features cannot be detected reliably and an exact segmentation of bone edges is not always feasible. An existing biplane radiograph system was simulated as two separate single-plane radiograph systems. Position and orientation of the underlying bone was determined for each single-plane view by generating projections through a 3-D volumetric model (from computed tomography), and producing an image (digitally reconstructed radiograph) similar (based on texture information and rough edges of bone) to the two-dimensional radiographs. The absolute 3-D pose was determined using known imaging geometry of the biplane radiograph system and a 3-D line intersection method. Results were compared to data of known accuracy, obtained from a previously established bone-implanted marker method. Difference of controlled in vitro tests was on the order of 0.5 mm for translation and 1.4/spl deg/ for rotation. A biplane radiograph sequence of a canine hindlimb during treadmill walking was used for in vivo testing, with differences on the order of 0.8 mm for translation and 2.5/spl deg/ for rotation.

The association between velocity of the center of closest proximity on subchondral bones and osteoarthritis progression

Altered surface interactions following joint instability may apply novel, damaging loads to articular cartilage. This study measured the velocity of the centers of closest proximity on subchondral bone surfaces on the femur and tibia during running in normal and unstable canine stifle (knee) joints. The purpose was to explore the relationship between the velocity of the centers of closest proximity on subchondral bones and the severity of cartilage damage. Dynamic biplane radiography was used to acquire serial knee kinematics [5 control, 18 cranial cruciate ligament (CCL) deficient] during treadmill running over 2 years. Custom software calculated the difference between the rate at which the center of closest proximity on the femur translated relative to the femur bone surface and the rate at which the center of closest proximity on the tibia translated relative to the tibia bone surface. Comparisons were made between dogs that developed minor versus major medial compartment cartilage damage over 2 years. Major damage dogs showed a significantly greater increase in the difference between femur and tibia medial compartment closest proximity point velocity from the instant of paw strike to peak velocity difference at 2, 4, and 6 months after CCL transaction. This implies increased tangential forces associated with the velocity of the compressed cartilage region during joint movement (plowing) may be a mechanism that initiates osteoarthritis (OA) development and drives OA progression. In the future, articulating surface velocity measurements may be useful to identify patients at risk for long‐term OA due to joint instability.

Validation of a noninvasive technique to precisely measure in vivo three-dimensional cervical spine movement.

Study Design. In vivo validation during functional loading. Objective. To determine the accuracy and repeatability of a model-based tracking technique that combines subject-specific computed tomographic (CT) models and high-speed biplane x-ray images to measure three-dimensional (3D) in vivo cervical spine motion. Summary of Background Data. Accurate 3D spine motion is difficult to obtain in vivo during physiological loading because of the inability to directly attach measurement equipment to individual vertebrae. Previous measurement systems were limited by two-dimensional (2D) results and/or their need for manual identification of anatomical landmarks, precipitating unreliable and inaccurate results. All previous techniques lack the ability to capture true 3D motion during dynamic functional loading. Methods. Three subjects had 1.0-mm-diameter tantalum beads implanted into their fused and adjacent vertebrae during anterior cervical discectomy and fusion surgery. High-resolution CT scans were obtained after surgery and used to create subject-specific 3D models of each cervical vertebra. Biplane x-ray images were collected at 30 frames per second while the subjects performed flexion/extension and axial rotation movements 6 months after surgery. Individual bone motion, intervertebral kinematics, and arthrokinematics derived from dynamic radiostereophotogrammetric analysis served as a gold standard to evaluate the accuracy of the model-based tracking technique. Results. Individual bones were tracked with an average precision of 0.19 and 0.33 mm in nonfused and fused bones, respectively. Precision in measuring 3D joint kinematics in fused and adjacent segments averaged 0.4 mm for translations and 1.1° for rotations, while anterior and posterior disc height above and below the fusion were measured with a precision ranging between 0.2 and 0.4 mm. The variability in 3D joint kinematics associated with tracking the same trial repeatedly was 0.02 mm in translation and 0.06° in rotation. Conclusion. The 3D cervical spine motion can be precisely measured in vivo with submillimeter accuracy during functional loading without the need for bead implantation. Fusion instrumentation did not diminish the accuracy of kinematic and arthrokinematic results. The semiautomated model-based tracking technique has excellent repeatability.

Model-Based Tracking of the Hip: Implications for Novel Analyses of Hip Pathology

This study investigated the efficacy of a combined high-speed, biplane radiography and model-based tracking technique to study hip joint kinematics and arthrokinematics. Comparing model-based tracking to the gold standard of radiostereometric analysis using implanted metal beads, joint translation was measured with a bias of 0.2 mm and a precision of 0.3 mm, whereas joint rotation was measured with a bias of 0.2° and a precision of 0.8°. A novel measure of hip arthrokinematics characterizing the region of closest contact in the anterosuperior acetabulum was measured with a bias of 0.9% and a precision of 2.5%. Model-based tracking of the hip thus provides the opportunity to noninvasively study hip pathologic conditions such as osteoarthritis and femoroacetabular impingement with great accuracy.

Motion path of the instant center of rotation in the cervical spine during in vivo dynamic flexion-extension: implications for artificial disc design and evaluation of motion quality after arthrodesis.

Study Design. Case-control. Objective. To characterize the motion path of the instant center of rotation (ICR) at each cervical motion segment from C2 to C7 during dynamic flexion-extension in asymptomatic subjects. To compare ICR paths in asymptomatic subjects and patients with single-level arthrodesis. Summary of Background Data. The ICR has been proposed as an alternative to range of motion (ROM) for evaluating the quality of spine movement and for identifying abnormal midrange kinematics. The motion path of the ICR during dynamic motion has not been reported. Methods. Twenty asymptomatic controls, 12 C5–C6, and 5 C6–C7 patients with arthrodesis performed full ROM flexion-extension, while biplane radiographs were obtained at 30 Hz. A previously validated tracking process determined 3-dimensional vertebral position with submillimeter accuracy. The finite helical axis method was used to calculate the ICR between adjacent vertebrae. A linear mixed-model analysis identified differences in the ICR path among motion segments and between controls and patients with arthrodesis. Results. From C2–C3 to C6–C7, the mean ICR location moved superior for each successive motion segment (P < 0.001). The anterior-posterior change in ICR location per degree of flexion-extension decreased from the C2–C3 motion segment to the C6–C7 motion segment (P < 0.001). Asymptomatic subject variability (95% confidence interval) in the ICR location averaged ± 1.2 mm in the superior-inferior direction and ± 1.9 mm in the anterior-posterior direction over all motion segments and flexion-extension angles. Asymptomatic and arthrodesis groups were not significantly different in terms of average ICR position (all P ≥ 0.091) or in terms of the change in ICR location per degree of flexion-extension (all P ≥ 0.249). Conclusion. To replicate asymptomatic in vivo cervical motion, disc replacements should account for level-specific differences in the location and motion path of ICR. Single-level anterior arthrodesis does not seem to affect cervical motion quality during flexion-extension. Level of Evidence: 4

Six-degrees-of-freedom cervical spine range of motion during dynamic flexion-extension after single-level anterior arthrodesis: comparison with asymptomatic control subjects.

BACKGROUND The etiology of adjacent-segment disease following cervical spine arthrodesis remains controversial. The objective of the current study was to evaluate cervical intervertebral range of motion during dynamic flexion-extension in patients who had undergone a single-level arthrodesis and in asymptomatic control subjects. METHODS Ten patients who had undergone a single-level (C5/C6) anterior arthrodesis and twenty asymptomatic control subjects performed continuous full range-of-motion flexion-extension while biplane radiographs were collected at thirty images per second. A previously validated tracking process determined three-dimensional vertebral position on each pair of radiographs with submillimeter accuracy. Six-degrees-of-freedom kinematics between adjacent vertebrae were calculated throughout the entire flexion-extension movement cycle over multiple trials for each participant. Cervical kinematics were also calculated from images collected during static full flexion and static full extension. RESULTS The C4/C5 motion segment moved through a larger extension range of motion and a smaller flexion range of motion in the subjects with the arthrodesis than in the controls. The extension difference between the arthrodesis and control groups was 3.8° (95% CI [confidence interval], 0.9° to 6.6°; p = 0.011) and the flexion difference was -2.9° (95% CI, -5.3° to -0.5°; p = 0.019). Adjacent-segment posterior translation was greater in the arthrodesis group than in the controls, with a C4/C5 difference of 0.8 mm (95% CI, 0.0 to 1.6 mm) and a C6/C7 difference of 0.4 mm (95% CI, 0.0 to 0.8 mm; p = 0.016). Translation range of motion and rotation range of motion were consistently larger when measured on images collected during dynamic functional movement as opposed to images collected at static full flexion or full extension. The upper 95% CI limit for anterior-posterior translation range of motion was 3.45 mm at C3/C4 and C4/C5, but only 2.3 mm at C6/C7. CONCLUSIONS C5/C6 arthrodesis does not affect the total range of motion in adjacent vertebral segments, but it does alter the distribution of adjacent-segment motion toward more extension and less flexion superior to the arthrodesis and more posterior translation superior and inferior to the arthrodesis during in vivo functional loading. Range of motion measured from static full-flexion and full-extension images underestimates dynamic range of motion. Clinical evaluation of excessive anterior-posterior translation should take into account the cervical vertebral level.

Cervical spine intervertebral kinematics with respect to the head are different during flexion and extension motions.

Previous dynamic imaging studies of the cervical spine have focused entirely on intervertebral kinematics while neglecting to investigate the relationship between head motion and intervertebral motion. Specifically, it is unknown if the relationship between head and intervertebral kinematics is affected by movement direction. We tested the hypothesis that there would be no difference in sagittal plane intervertebral angles at identical head orientations during the flexion and extension movements. Nineteen asymptomatic subjects performed continuous head flexion-extension movements while biplane radiographs were collected at 30 images per second. A previously validated model-based volumetric tracking process determined three-dimensional vertebral position with sub-millimeter accuracy throughout the flexion-extension motion. Head movement was recorded at 60 Hz using conventional motion analysis and reflective markers. Intervertebral angles were determined at identical head orientations during the flexion and extension movements. Cervical motion segments were in a more extended orientation during flexion and in a more flexed orientation during extension for any given head orientation. The results suggest that static radiographs cannot accurately represent vertebral orientation during dynamic motion. Further, data should be collected during both flexion and extension movements when investigating intervertebral kinematics with respect to global head orientation. Also, in vitro protocols that use intervertebral total range of motion as validation criteria may be improved by assessing model fidelity using continuous intervertebral kinematics in flexion and in extension. Finally, musculoskeletal models of the head and cervical spine should account for the direction of head motion when determining muscle moment arms because vertebral orientations (and therefore muscle attachment sites) are dependent on the direction of head motion.