Development of Multibundle Virtual Ligaments to Simulate Knee Mechanics After Total Knee Arthroplasty
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Preclinical evaluation of total knee arthroplasty (TKA) components is essential to understanding their mechanical behavior and developing strategies for improving joint stability. While preclinical testing of TKA components has been useful in quantifying their effectiveness, such testing can be criticized for lacking clinical relevance, as the important contributions of surrounding soft tissues are either neglected or greatly simplified. The purpose of our study was to develop and determine if subject-specific virtual ligaments reproduce a similar behavior as native ligaments surrounding TKA joints. Six TKA knees were mounted to a motion simulator. Each was subjected to tests of anterior-posterior (AP), internal-external (IE), and varus-valgus (VV) laxity. The forces transmitted through major ligaments were measured using a sequential resection technique. By tuning the measured ligament forces and elongations to a generic nonlinear elastic ligament model, virtual ligaments were designed and used to simulate the soft tissue envelope around isolated TKA components. The average root-mean-square error (RMSE) between the laxity results of TKA joints with native versus virtual ligaments was 3.5 ± 1.8 mm during AP translation, 7.5 ± 4.2 deg during IE rotations, and 2.0 ± 1.2 deg during VV rotations. Interclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) indicated a good level of reliability for AP and IE laxity (0.85 and 0.84). To conclude, the advancement of virtual ligament envelopes as a more realistic representation of soft tissue constraint around TKA joints is a valuable approach for obtaining clinically relevant kinematics when testing TKA components on joint motion simulators.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".