BACKGROUND: Variations observed in biomechanical studies might be attributed to errors made by operators during the construction of musculoskeletal models, rather than being solely attributed to patient-specific geometry. RESEARCH QUESTION: What is the impact of operator errors on the construction of musculoskeletal models, and how does it affect the estimation of muscle moment arms and hip joint reaction forces? METHODS: Thirteen independent operators participated in defining the muscle model, while a single operator performed 13 repetitions to define the muscle model based on 3D bone geometry. For each model, the muscle moment arms relative to the hip joint center of rotation was evaluated. Additionally, the hip joint reaction force during one-legged stance was assessed using static inverse optimization. RESULTS: The results indicated high levels of consistency, as evidenced by the intra- rater and inter-rater agreement measured by the Intraclass Correlation Coefficient (ICC), which yielded values of 0.95 and 0.99, respectively. However, the estimated muscle moment arms exhibited an error of up to 16 mm compared to the reference musculoskeletal model. It was found that muscles attached to prominent anatomical landmarks were specified with greater accuracy than those attached over larger areas. Furthermore, the variability in estimated moment arms contributed to variations of up to 12% in the hip joint reaction forces. SIGNIFICANCE: Both moment arm and muscle force demonstrated significantly lower variability when assessed by a single operator, suggesting the preference for employing a single operator in the creation of musculoskeletal models for clinical biomechanical studies.
- MeSH
- biologické modely MeSH
- biomechanika MeSH
- kosterní svaly * fyziologie MeSH
- kyčelní kloub * fyziologie MeSH
- lidé MeSH
- Check Tag
- lidé MeSH
- Publikační typ
- časopisecké články MeSH
BACKGROUNDS: Oncological outcomes of the robotic low anterior rectal resection with total mesorectal excision (TME) are still under discussion. Few studies have proven that robotic TME (rTME) is a safe and equivalent method for treatment of rectal carcinoma. But there is almost no comparison between the rTME and conventional TME in terms of the number of lymph nodes obtained and the quality of the TME. METHODS: A single institution retrospective study was designed in a cohort of 261 patients. Cohort was divided into two groups depending on the type of surgery (rTME versus TME) and within these two groups, patients were divided according to whether they underwent neoadjuvant chemoradiation (nCHRT) or did not. The primary objective of the study was to compare obtained number of the lymph nodes in specimen. Secondary objectives were comparison of the quality of the TME and the number of positive circumferential resection margins. RESULTS: Results of the study have shown no significant difference in number of the lymph nodes obtained by the rTME and TME. There was no difference in the quality of the TME, neither in the group with the previous nCHRT nor in the group without a nCHRT. CONCLUSION: With results from the study we consider the rTME to be non-inferior to the conventional TME. Therefore, at least identical oncological results can be expected in patients treated by the rTME.
- Publikační typ
- abstrakt z konference MeSH
- Publikační typ
- abstrakt z konference MeSH
- Publikační typ
- abstrakt z konference MeSH
