4.5 Article

In vivo patellar tracking and patellofemoral cartilage contacts during dynamic stair ascending

期刊

JOURNAL OF BIOMECHANICS
卷 45, 期 14, 页码 2432-2437

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.jbiomech.2012.06.034

关键词

Patellar tracking; Patellofemoral cartilage contact

资金

  1. National Institute of Health [R01 AR055612]
  2. Department of Orthopaedic Surgery at the Massachusetts General Hospital

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The knowledge of normal patellar tracking is essential for understanding the knee joint function and for diagnosis of patellar instabilities. This paper investigated the patellar tracking and patellofemoral joint contact locations during a stair ascending activity using a validated dual-fluoroscopic imaging system. The results showed that the patellar flexion angle decreased from 41.9 degrees to 7.5 degrees with knee extension during stair ascending. During first 80% of the activity, the patella shifted medially about 3.9 mm and then slightly shifted laterally during the last 20% of the ascending activity. Anterior translation of 13 mm of the patella was measured at the early 80% of the activity and the patella slightly moved posteriorly by about 2 mm at the last 20% of the activity. The path of cartilage contact points was slightly lateral on the cartilage surfaces of patella and femur. On the patellar cartilage surface, the cartilage contact locations were about 2 mm laterally from heel strike to 60% of the stair ascending activity and moved laterally and reached 5.3 mm at full extension. However, the cartilage contact locations were relatively constant on the femoral cartilage surface ( similar to 5 mm lateral). The patellar tracking pattern was consistent with the patellofemoral cartilage contact location pattern. These data could provide baseline knowledge for understanding of normal physiology of the patellofemoral joint and can be used as a reference for clinical evaluation of patellofemoral disorders. (C) 2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据