Sensitivity of predicted muscle forces during gait to anatomical variability in musculotendon geometry. Issue 10 (16th July 2015)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Bosmans, Lode; Valente, Giordano; Wesseling, Mariska; Van Campen, Anke; De Groote, Friedl; De Schutter, Joris; Jonkers, Ilse
• Is Part Of: Journal of biomechanics. Volume 48:Issue 10(2015)
• Page Start: 2116
• Page End: 2123
• Publication Date: 2015-07-16
• Subjects: Animal mechanics -- Periodicals; Biomechanics -- Periodicals; Biomechanics -- Periodicals; Mécanique animale -- Périodiques; Biomécanique -- Périodiques; Electronic journals; 571.4305
• DOI: 10.1016/j.jbiomech.2015.02.052
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0021-9290

Abstract

<abstract abstract-type="author" id="ab0005"> <title id="sect0005">Abstract</title> <sec> <p id="sp0045">Scaled generic musculoskeletal models are commonly used to drive dynamic simulations of motions. It is however, acknowledged that not accounting for variability in musculoskeletal geometry and musculotendon parameters may confound the simulation results, even when analysing control subjects. This study documents the three-dimensional anatomical variability of musculotendon origins and insertions of 33 lower limb muscles determined based on magnetic resonance imaging in six subjects. This anatomical variability was compared to the musculotendon point location in a generic musculoskeletal model. Furthermore, the sensitivity of muscle forces during gait, calculated using static optimization, to perturbations of the musculotendon point location was analyzed with a generic model. More specific, a probabilistic approach was used: for each analyzed musculotendon point, the three-dimensional location was re-sampled with a uniform Latin hypercube method within the anatomical variability and the static optimization problem was then re-solved for all perturbations. We found that musculotendon point locations in the generic model showed only variable correspondences with the anatomical variability. The anatomical variability of musculotendon point location did affect the calculated muscle forces: muscles most sensitive to perturbations within the anatomical variability are iliacus and psoas. Perturbation of the gluteus medius anterior, iliacus and psoas induces the largest concomitant changes in muscle forces of the unperturbed muscles. Therefore, when creating subject-specific musculoskeletal models, these attachment points should be defined accurately. In addition, the size of the anatomical variability of the musculotendon point location was not related to the sensitivity of the calculated muscle forces.</p> </sec> </abstract>