Abstract
Introduction
In knee biomechanics the concept of the envelope of motion (EOM) has proven to be a powerful method to characterize joint mechanics and the effect of surgical interventions. It is furthermore indispensable for numerical model validation. While commonly used for tibiofemoral kinematics, there is very little report of applying the concept to patellofemoral kinematics. EOM measurements require precise and reproducible displacement and load control in all degrees of freedom (DOF), which robotic testing has proven to provide. The objectives of this study were therefore to (1) develop a robotic method to assess patellofemoral EOM as a function of tibiofemoral EOM, (2) compare resulting patellofemoral kinematics to published data, and (3) determine which DOFs in the tibiofemoral EOM mostly account for the patellofemoral EOM.
Material and Methods
The developed robotic (KUKA KR140 comp) method was evaluated using 8 post-mortem human leg specimens of both genders (age: 55±11 years, BMI: 23±5). Firstly, tibiofemoral neutral flexion was established as well as the EOM by applying anterior-posterior (±100 N), medial-lateral (±100 N), internal-external (±4 Nm) and varus-valgus (±12 Nm) loads under low compression (44 N) at 7 flexion angles. Secondly, patellofemoral flexion kinematics and EOM were measured during a robotic playback of the previously established tibiofemoral kinematics. During these measurements, the quadriceps tendon was loaded with a hanging weight (20 kg) via a pulley system directing the force to the anterior superior iliac spine. Kinematics were tracked optically (OptiTrack) and registered to CT scans using co-scanned aluminum cylinders and beads embedded in the patella.
The overall patellofemoral EOM was calculated as the extent of patellar motion observed during manipulating the tibia inside the tibiofemoral EOM in all DOFs. Additionally, patellofemoral EOMs were calculated for tibial manipulations along individual DOFs to analyze the importance of these DOFs.
Results
Trends and magnitudes of patella shift, tilt and rotation during knee flexion were similar to reported in-vivo measurements. Envelopes of patellar shift and tilt during internal-external tibiofemoral rotation closely resembled those reported for in-vitro results despite methodological differences.
Tibiofemoral internal-external and varus-valgus rotation had the largest effect on patellofemoral EOM. EOMs in patellar shift and tilt were dominated by internal-external rotation in early flexion and varus-valgus rotation in late flexion. The EOM in patellar rotation was dominated by tibiofemoral varus-valgus rotation throughout flexion.
Manipulating the tibia in a combined internal-external and varus-valgus rotation envelope yielded the same patellofemoral EOM as the overall patellofemoral EOM.
Conclusion
This study has established a novel robotic method to assess the patellofemoral envelope of motion as a function of tibiofemoral EOM. Resulting patellofemoral kinematics resembled data reported in literature. It was furthermore shown that is sufficient to establish a combined internal-external and varus-valgus envelope of tibiofemoral motion as bases of the patellofemoral EOM, as including the anterior-posterior and medial-lateral tibiofemoral envelopes yielded no additional effect.
