{"title":"Dynamic imaging and wrist biomechanics: a narrative review.","authors":"Ziyue Xiang, Shijie Jia, Shanlin Chen","doi":"10.1177/17531934261452068","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>The wrist is a complex joint with tightly coupled intercarpal kinematics that remain difficult to interpret clinically. Traditional models, derived from static imaging and cadaveric studies, treat the wrist as a three-dimensional structure. However, wrist biomechanics is inherently dynamic, emerging from interactions across motion phases, loading conditions and functional tasks. Current limitations contribute to under-recognition of clinically relevant instability.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This narrative review summarizes representative studies from the past 10-15 years, with emphasis on <i>in vivo</i> dynamic imaging studies reporting quantitative kinematic outcomes. Four modalities (4D-CT, biplanar videoradiography, four-dimensional magnetic resonance imaging and motion capture) were evaluated in terms of kinematic findings and clinical utility, with findings organized by substructure.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Dynamic imaging demonstrates that wrist kinematics are phase-, load- and task-dependent. Abnormalities such as scapholunate instability may only become apparent during specific phases of motion or under physiological loading. 4D-CT currently provides the most accessible <i>in vivo</i> assessment of intercarpal coordination, while biplanar videoradiography offers high-precision kinematic analysis in controlled settings. Motion capture characterizes task-dependent wrist motion for functional activities but lacks intercarpal resolution, whereas four-dimensional magnetic resonance imaging offers potential for integrating soft-tissue behaviour, although current applications remain limited.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Dynamic imaging shows that wrist instability arises from abnormal motion patterns rather than a static structural abnormality. Rather than competing, these modalities provide complementary, structure-specific insights. This framework supports clinical interpretation of wrist instability and guides appropriate technique selection. However, clinical interpretation will require further standardized protocols and clinically validated thresholds.</p>","PeriodicalId":94237,"journal":{"name":"The Journal of hand surgery, European volume","volume":" ","pages":"1378-1385"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2026-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Journal of hand surgery, European volume","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/17531934261452068","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2026/5/31 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Introduction: The wrist is a complex joint with tightly coupled intercarpal kinematics that remain difficult to interpret clinically. Traditional models, derived from static imaging and cadaveric studies, treat the wrist as a three-dimensional structure. However, wrist biomechanics is inherently dynamic, emerging from interactions across motion phases, loading conditions and functional tasks. Current limitations contribute to under-recognition of clinically relevant instability.
Methods: This narrative review summarizes representative studies from the past 10-15 years, with emphasis on in vivo dynamic imaging studies reporting quantitative kinematic outcomes. Four modalities (4D-CT, biplanar videoradiography, four-dimensional magnetic resonance imaging and motion capture) were evaluated in terms of kinematic findings and clinical utility, with findings organized by substructure.
Results: Dynamic imaging demonstrates that wrist kinematics are phase-, load- and task-dependent. Abnormalities such as scapholunate instability may only become apparent during specific phases of motion or under physiological loading. 4D-CT currently provides the most accessible in vivo assessment of intercarpal coordination, while biplanar videoradiography offers high-precision kinematic analysis in controlled settings. Motion capture characterizes task-dependent wrist motion for functional activities but lacks intercarpal resolution, whereas four-dimensional magnetic resonance imaging offers potential for integrating soft-tissue behaviour, although current applications remain limited.
Conclusion: Dynamic imaging shows that wrist instability arises from abnormal motion patterns rather than a static structural abnormality. Rather than competing, these modalities provide complementary, structure-specific insights. This framework supports clinical interpretation of wrist instability and guides appropriate technique selection. However, clinical interpretation will require further standardized protocols and clinically validated thresholds.