0
TECHNICAL BRIEFS

A MR Imaging Procedure to Measure Tarsal Bone Rotations

[+] Author and Article Information
P. Wolf1

 Sensory-Motor Systems Laboratory, ETH Zurich, Tannenstrasse 1, 8092 Zurich, Switzerlandpwolf@ethz.ch

R. Luechinger, P. Boesiger

Institute for Biomedical Engineering, University and Zurich, Gloriastrasse 35, 8092 Zurich, Switzerland; ETH Zurich, Wolfgang-Pauli-Strasse 10, 8093 Zurich, Switzerland

E. Stuessi, A. Stacoff

 Institute for Biomechanics, ETH Zurich, Wolfgang-Pauli-Strasse 10, 8093 Zurich, Switzerland

1

Corresponding author.

J Biomech Eng 129(6), 931-936 (May 08, 2007) (6 pages) doi:10.1115/1.2805400 History: Received September 15, 2006; Revised May 08, 2007

Magnetic resonance imaging offers unique insights into three-dimensional foot bone motion. Thereby, adequate devices enabling defined loading and positioning of the foot are needed to profit from this noninvasive procedure. Tarsal bone positions of three healthy subjects were repeatedly measured in a pronated and a supinated foot excursion under bodyweight with a newly developed MR imaging procedure. The quantification of the transferred motion from the loading and positioning device to the calcaneus and an estimation of the required degrees to distinguish between tarsal joint rotations were used to evaluate the applicability of the procedure to investigate tarsal joint motion. It was found that 45–70% (75–95%) of the externally applied 15deg foot pronation (supination) were transferred to the calcaneus. Furthermore, the talonavicular joint showed the largest amount of rotation up to 20deg eversion-inversion and abadduction, followed by the subtalar joint showing nearly half of that motion. Considerably less motion was found between the cuboid and calcaneus (about 26deg) and the cuboid nearly did not rotate relative to the navicular (on average 1deg). The estimated necessary differences between tarsal joint movements to identify individual kinematic behavior were in the order of 2deg (4deg related to the talonavicular joint). Since the results were in agreement with the literature, it is concluded that the applicability of the presented procedure to investigate tarsal bone mechanics is warranted. The possibility to evaluate 3D tarsal joint motion in combination with bone morphology (e.g., joint curvature) may provide new insights in the still uncertain relationship between foot function and foot morphology.

FIGURES IN THIS ARTICLE
<>
Copyright © 2007 by American Society of Mechanical Engineers
Topics: Motion , Bone , Imaging , Rotation
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 1

Foot loading and positioning device used in the MR. In detail, dolly with a supinated foot placed on it and 3D reconstructed tarsal bones: calcaneus (i), cuboid (ii), navicular (iii), and talus (iv). The foot was only fixed by the load of half bodyweight (0.5 BW) transferred by a double pulley. The used blocks are shown from above: (a) the neutral one, (b) induced foot supination, and (c) induced foot pronation.

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 2

Motion of the talar bones due to pronation block. Neutral positions are plotted transparently. Anterior view (a): qualitatively evident EV of calcaneus, cuboid, and navicular relative to talus. Medial view (b): visible dorsiflexion (DF) of calcaneus relative to talus. Superior view (c): noticeable ABD of cuboid and navicular relative to talus.

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 3

Motion of the talar bones due to supination block. Neutral positions are plotted transparently. Anterior view (a): qualitatively remarkable INV of calcaneus, cuboid, and navicular relative to talus. Superior view (c): obvious ADD of cuboid and navicular relative to talus.

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 4

Relative motion in the talocrural joint in response to foot pronation (pro) and supination (sup) for the three subjects (Subjects A, B, and C). Each bar represents one trial whereas same textural patterns were used for the same subject and foot position; thus, bars with corresponding textural pattern were repeated measurements.

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 5

Relative motion in the subtalar joint due to pro and sup foot positions. Each bar represents one trial whereas same textural patterns were used for the same subject (Subjects A, B, and C) and foot position.

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 6

Motion of the cuboid relative to the calcaneus due to pro and sup foot positions. Each bar represents one trial whereas same textural patterns were used for the same subject (Subjects A, B, and C) and foot position.

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 7

Motion of the cuboid relative to the navicular due to pro and sup foot positions. Each bar represents one trial whereas same textural patterns were used for the same subject (Subjects A, B, and C) and foot position.

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 8

Relative motion in the talo-navicular joint due to pro and sup foot positions. Each bar represents one trial whereas same textural patterns were used for the same subject (Subjects A, B, and C) and foot position.

Tables

Errata

Discussions

Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging and repositioning the boxes below.

Related Journal Articles
Related eBook Content
Topic Collections

Sorry! You do not have access to this content. For assistance or to subscribe, please contact us:

  • TELEPHONE: 1-800-843-2763 (Toll-free in the USA)
  • EMAIL: asmedigitalcollection@asme.org
Sign In