![]() ![]() This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.ĭata Availability: All relevant data are within the paper. Received: JAccepted: DecemPublished: January 5, 2016Ĭopyright: © 2016 Liu et al. PLoS ONE 11(1):Įmory University School Of Medicine, UNITED STATES Patient Specific Cartilage Models for an Optimized Computer-Assisted Planning of Periacetabular Osteotomy. Computer assisted planning with FE modeling using constant thickness cartilage models might be a promising PAO planning tool when a conventional CT is available.Ĭitation: Liu L, Ecker TM, Schumann S, Siebenrock K-A, Zheng G (2016) Evaluation of Constant Thickness Cartilage Models vs. Good correlation for these two models was detected. Our study is the first study comparing peak contact pressures and contact areas between patient specific and constant thickness cartilage models during PAO planning. For both cartilage models, the largest contact areas and the lowest peak pressures were found at the same position. Comparison of the peak contact pressures and the contact areas between these two different cartilage models showed that good correlation between these two cartilage models for peak contact pressures (r = 0.634 ∈, p 0.8, p < 0.001). In order to investigate the influence of using patient specific cartilage model or constant thickness cartilage model on the biomechanical simulation results, the same procedure was repeated with the same bone models but with a cartilage mesh of constant thickness. The position with the largest contact area and the lowest peak contact pressure was defined as the optimal position. Afterwards we used a validated preoperative planning software to change the acetabular inclination by an increment of 5° and measured the lateral center edge angle (LCE) at each reorientation position. Peak contact pressures and contact areas were estimated in the original position. Mesh models for the patient specific cartilage were defined and subsequently loaded under previously reported boundary and loading conditions. Image data were available from CT arthrography studies. Ten specimens with hip dysplasia were used in this study. ![]() Furthermore we investigated the influences of using patient specific cartilage model or constant thickness cartilage model on the biomechanical simulation results. We performed a finite element analysis investigating the optimal reorientation of the acetabulum in PAO surgery based on simulated joint contact pressures and contact areas using patient specific cartilage model. The latter relies on estimation of peak contact pressures and contact areas using either patient specific or constant thickness cartilage models. Modern computerized planning tools for periacetabular osteotomy (PAO) use either morphology-based or biomechanics-based methods. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |