(C) 2009 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.”
“The main goal of this study was to study the www.selleckchem.com/products/lcl161.html performance of fuzzy logic controllers combined with simplified hybrid amplitude/pulse-width (AM/PW) modulation to regulate muscle force via nerve electrical stimulation. The recruitment curves with AM/PW and AM modulations were constructed for the calf muscles of rabbits. Integrated with the modulation methods, a proportional-integral-derivative (PID) and three fuzzy logic controllers were designed and applied for the electrical stimulation of tibial nerves to control the

ankle torque under isometric conditions. The performance of the two modulation methods combined with the four controllers was compared when the ankle was fixed at three positions for both in vivo

experiments and model simulations using a nonlinear muscle model. For the animal experiments, AM/PW modulation performed better than AM modulation alone. The fuzzy PI controller performed marginally better and was resistant to external noises, though it tended to have a larger overshoot. The performance of the controllers had a similar trend in the three different joint positions, and the simulation results with the nonlinear model matched the experimental results well. In conclusion, AM/PW modulation improved controller performance, while the contribution

of fuzzy logic was only marginal.”
“Background: Quizartinib mouse Glenoid reconstruction with distal tibial allografts offers the theoretical advantage over Latarjet reconstruction of improved joint congruity and a cartilaginous articulation for the humeral head.\n\nHypothesis/Purpose: To investigate changes in the magnitude and location of glenohumeral contact areas, contact pressures, and peak forces after (1) the creation of a 30% anterior glenoid defect and subsequent glenoid bone augmentation Epoxomicin research buy with (2) a flush Latarjet coracoid graft or (3) a distal tibial osteochondral allograft. It was hypothesized that the distal tibial bone graft would best normalize glenohumeral contact areas, contact pressures, and peak forces.\n\nStudy Design: Controlled laboratory study.\n\nMethods: Eight cadaveric shoulder specimens were dissected free of all soft tissues and randomly tested in 3 static positions of humeral abduction with a 440-N compressive load: 30 degrees, 60 degrees, and 60 degrees of abduction with 90 degrees of external rotation (ABER). Glenohumeral contact area, contact pressure, and peak force were determined sequentially using a digital pressure mapping system for (1) the intact glenoid, (2) the glenoid with a 30% anterior bone defect, and (3) the glenoid after reconstruction with a distal tibial allograft or a Latarjet bone block.