Dataset Information

Biomechanical Study of a Tricompartmental Unloader Brace for Patellofemoral or Multicompartment Knee Osteoarthritis.

ABSTRACT: Objective: Off-loader knee braces have traditionally focused on redistributing loads away from either the medial or lateral tibiofemoral (TF) compartments. In this article, we study the potential of a novel "tricompartment unloader" (TCU) knee brace intended to simultaneously unload both the patellofemoral (PF) and TF joints during knee flexion. Three different models of the TCU brace are evaluated for their potential to unload the knee joint. Methods: A sagittal plane model of the knee was used to compute PF and TF contact forces, patellar and quadriceps tendon forces, and forces in the anterior and posterior cruciate ligaments during a deep knee bend (DKB) test using motion analysis data from eight participants. Forces were computed for the observed (no brace) and simulated braced conditions. A sensitivity and validity analysis was conducted to determine the valid output range for the model, and Statistical Parameter Mapping was used to quantify the effectual region of the different TCU brace models. Results: PF and TF joint force calculations were valid between ~0 and 100 degrees of flexion. All three simulated brace models significantly (p < 0.001) reduced predicted knee joint loads (by 30-50%) across all structures, at knee flexion angles >~30 degrees during DKB. Conclusions: The TCU brace is predicted to reduce PF and TF knee joint contact loads during weight-bearing activity requiring knee flexion angles between 30 and 100 degrees; this effect may be clinically beneficial for pain reduction or rehabilitation from common knee injuries or joint disorders. Future work is needed to assess the range of possible clinical and prophylactic benefits of the TCU brace.

SUBMITTER: McGibbon CA

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7876241 | biostudies-literature | 2020

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Biomechanical Study of a Tricompartmental Unloader Brace for Patellofemoral or Multicompartment Knee Osteoarthritis.

McGibbon Chris A CA Brandon Scott S Bishop Emily L EL Cowper-Smith Chris C Biden Edmund N EN

Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology 20210128

<b>Objective:</b> Off-loader knee braces have traditionally focused on redistributing loads away from either the medial or lateral tibiofemoral (TF) compartments. In this article, we study the potential of a novel "tricompartment unloader" (TCU) knee brace intended to simultaneously unload both the patellofemoral (PF) and TF joints during knee flexion. Three different models of the TCU brace are evaluated for their potential to unload the knee joint. <b>Methods:</b> A sagittal plane model of the ...[more]

PMID: 33585409

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundIsolated patellofemoral osteoarthritis (PF-OA) is a common subtype of knee osteoarthritis, leading to a huge economic burden on health care systems. Although previous studies have shown that patellofemoral arthroplasty (PFA) and total knee arthroplasty (TKA) have good clinical effects, it remains largely unclear which treatment is more effective for patients with isolated PF-OA. We aimed to compare postoperative function, complications, revision rates, level of physical activity, and satisfaction rate between the two surgical techniques.MethodsOur study followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) guidelines. Search of literature was conducted in MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science until November 2020. The included studies were those that provided direct comparison of postoperative outcomes between PFA and TKA. Data were extracted from eligible studies and combined to calculate the pooled odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence interval (CI). Sensitivity analysis and subgroup analysis were conducted to evaluate heterogeneity between the two groups.ResultsA total of 7 eligible studies (3 recent randomized controlled trials and 4 nonrandomized controlled trials) were included in this meta-analysis. The pooled results showed that both the PFA group and the TKA group had improved postoperative indicators, suggesting that the two operation modes could improve the knee function and quality of life of patients. Throughout the first 2 years postoperatively, higher activity level, and better functional recovery were observed for PFA compared with TKA in this study; moreover, the differences between the two operation modes were statistically significant (p < 0.05). We found no significant difference in complications, revision rates, and satisfaction rate between the two procedures.ConclusionAlthough there was no observed difference in the complications, revision rates, and satisfaction rate between PFA and TKA, PFA was superior to TKA in terms of knee function and physical activity in the first 2 years postoperatively. Therefore, PFA is a safe, effective, and less invasive treatment for patients with isolated PF-OA. Our findings are consistent with the systematic review of current evidence that PFA may be more suitable for younger patients with high activity needs. Patient selection is, therefore, thought to be of paramount importance. Individualized surgical plan should be designed according to the patient's age, BMI, KOA site, and activity level and combined with the doctor's personal experience.

Project description:Background:Interest in bicompartmental knee arthroplasty (BKA) for the treatment of medial patellofemoral osteoarthritis (MPFOA) has grown in recent years because BKA offers a bone and ligament-preserving alternative to total knee arthroplasty (TKA). BKA only resurfaces the diseased compartments, while preserving proprioception and native knee kinematics. Therefore, the objective of this study is to assess knee function, perioperative morbidity, and implant survivability in patients undergoing BKA vs TKA for MPFOA. Methods:The databases MEDLINE, PUBMED, and EMBASE were systematically searched. Randomized controlled trials and nonrandomized comparative studies comparing BKA with TKA for the treatment of MPFOA were included for further analysis. The primary outcome of interest was knee function. Secondary outcomes included range of movement, operation length, intraoperative blood loss, hospital length of stay, postoperative complications, and rate of revision length. The quality of evidence was evaluated using the GRADE approach. Meta-analysis was performed by pooling the results of the selected studies when possible. Results:Six studies were selected for inclusion (4 prospective studies and 2 retrospective cohort studies). In total, 274 patients and 277 knees were included for analysis. There were no significant differences between the 2 groups at any time points in terms of knee function, length of stay, complication rate, or revision rate, when monolithic BKA designs were controlled for. BKA did result in significantly decreased intraoperative blood loss, at the expense of increased operative length compared with TKA. Conclusions:The use of modular BKA for MPFOA is comparable with TKA in terms of short-term function, complication rate, and revision rate. BKA reduces intraoperative blood losses, but it is also more technically demanding, resulting in increased operation length. The use of modular BKA has acceptable short-term outcomes, but more long-term data are needed before it can be recommended for routine use in the treatment of MPFOA. The selection of modular BKA should be determined on a patient-specific basis. Currently, there is no evidence to suggest the use of monolithic BKA designs because of their high revision and failure rate.

Project description:BackgroundCurrent clinical guidelines recommend conservative management including non-pharmacologic therapy prior to considering surgery for knee OA. There is a paucity of clinical trials investigating the use of biomechanical device therapies on those with patellofemoral joint osteoarthritis (PFJOA). The aim was to systematically review the effectiveness of biomechanical devices (bracing, taping, and footwear) in the management of symptomatic PFJOA.MethodThe Cochrane, PEDro, MEDLINE, CINAHL, AMED and EMBASE electronic databases were search from inception to October 31, 2020. Included studies were randomised controlled or clinical trials studying any form of biomechanical device therapy in the management of PFJOA in the English language. Studies included in the search were quality-appraised using the PEDro scoring system.ResultEleven studies were identified which included assessment of either patellar taping, or foot orthotics, knee bracing or combined physiotherapy treatments. Trial quality ranged from 'poor' through 'fair' to 'good'. For patellar bracing, pooled analysis of two good quality randomised controlled trials showed no overall significant improvement on a visual analogue scale (VAS) (random effects (RE) standardised mean difference (SMD) = -0.42 (95%CI -1.12 to +0.29). Pooled data from the same two studies showed a non-significant improvement in favour of bracing assessed by the KOOS/WOMAC (RE SMD = -0.18 (95%CI -0.66 to +0.31). Two studies of 'fair' and 'good' quality applying patellar tape showed a significant reduction in pain immediately after application and after 4 days. A randomised trial of a foot orthotic showed a non-significant improvement in pain after 6 weeks with a between groups adjusted mean difference for maximum VAS of 21.9 mm (95% CI - 2.1 to 46.0) and 8.1 (95% CI- 6.9 to 23.1) for KOOS pain. A multimodal physiotherapy intervention (which included taping in two studies) showed a pooled significant improvement in VAS (SMD = -0.4; (95% CI -0.71 to -0.09) at 3 months compared to controls.ConclusionThere is some good quality evidence that a combined physiotherapy approach significantly reduces short-term pain in those with PFJOA. Long-term effects of all interventions are still unknown, which indicates the need for further research to determine the longer term impact of all biomechanical devices on outcomes in symptomatic PFJOA.

Project description:ImportanceIndividually calibrated biomechanical footwear therapy may improve pain and physical function in people with symptomatic knee osteoarthritis, but the benefits of this therapy are unclear.ObjectiveTo assess the effect of a biomechanical footwear therapy vs control footwear over 24 weeks of follow-up.Design, setting, and participantsRandomized clinical trial conducted at a Swiss university hospital. Participants (N = 220) with symptomatic, radiologically confirmed knee osteoarthritis were recruited between April 20, 2015, and January 10, 2017. The last participant visit occurred on August 15, 2017.InterventionsParticipants were randomized to biomechanical footwear involving shoes with individually adjustable external convex pods attached to the outsole (n = 111) or to control footwear (n = 109) that had visible outsole pods that were not adjustable and did not create a convex walking surface.Main outcomes and measuresThe primary outcome was knee pain at 24 weeks of follow-up assessed with the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) pain subscore standardized to range from 0 (no symptoms) to 10 (extreme symptoms). The secondary outcomes included WOMAC physical function and stiffness subscores and the WOMAC global score, all ranging from 0 (no symptoms) to 10 (extreme symptoms) at 24 weeks of follow-up, and serious adverse events.ResultsAmong the 220 randomized participants (mean age, 65.2 years [SD, 9.3 years]; 104 women [47.3%]), 219 received the allocated treatment and 213 (96.8%) completed follow-up. At 24 weeks of follow-up, the mean standardized WOMAC pain subscore improved from 4.3 to 1.3 in the biomechanical footwear group and from 4.0 to 2.6 in the control footwear group (between-group difference in scores at 24 weeks of follow-up, -1.3 [95% CI, -1.8 to -0.9]; P < .001). The results were consistent for WOMAC physical function subscore (between-group difference, -1.1 [95% CI, -1.5 to -0.7]), WOMAC stiffness subscore (between-group difference, -1.4 [95% CI, -1.9 to -0.9]), and WOMAC global score (between-group difference, -1.2 [95% CI, -1.6 to -0.8]) at 24 weeks of follow-up. Three serious adverse events occurred in the biomechanical footwear group compared with 9 in the control footwear group (2.7% vs 8.3%, respectively); none were related to treatment.Conclusions and relevanceAmong participants with knee pain from osteoarthritis, use of biomechanical footwear compared with control footwear resulted in an improvement in pain at 24 weeks of follow-up that was statistically significant but of uncertain clinical importance. Further research would be needed to assess long-term efficacy and safety, as well as replication, before reaching conclusions about the clinical value of this device.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02363712.

Dataset Information

Biomechanical Study of a Tricompartmental Unloader Brace for Patellofemoral or Multicompartment Knee Osteoarthritis.

Publications

Biomechanical Study of a Tricompartmental Unloader Brace for Patellofemoral or Multicompartment Knee Osteoarthritis.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets