scholarly journals Restoring tibiofemoral alignment during ACL reconstruction results in better knee biomechanics

2017 ◽  
Vol 26 (5) ◽  
pp. 1367-1374
Author(s):  
Frantzeska Zampeli ◽  
Ioannis Terzidis ◽  
João Espregueira-Mendes ◽  
Jim-Dimitris Georgoulis ◽  
Manfred Bernard ◽  
...  
2015 ◽  
Vol 24 (5) ◽  
pp. 1501-1509 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michelle Hall ◽  
Adam L. Bryant ◽  
Tim V. Wrigley ◽  
Clare Pratt ◽  
Kay M. Crossley ◽  
...  

2018 ◽  
Vol 50 (5S) ◽  
pp. 253
Author(s):  
Julie P. Burland ◽  
Lindsey K. Lepley ◽  
Lindsay J. DiStefano ◽  
Steven. M. Davi ◽  
Adam S. Lepley

2009 ◽  
Vol 18 (1) ◽  
pp. 2-10 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yuki Kato ◽  
Sheila J. M. Ingham ◽  
Scott Kramer ◽  
Patrick Smolinski ◽  
Akiyoshi Saito ◽  
...  

2021 ◽  
pp. 194173812110049
Author(s):  
Riann M. Palmieri-Smith ◽  
Michael T. Curran ◽  
Steven A. Garcia ◽  
Chandramouli Krishnan

Background: Biomechanical knee asymmetry is commonly present after anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction. Factors that could assist in identification of asymmetrical biomechanics after ACL reconstruction could help clinicians in making return-to-play decisions. The purpose of this study is to determine factors that may contribute to knee biomechanical asymmetry present after ACL reconstruction. Hypothesis: We hypothesized that quadriceps strength and activation and patient-reported function would allow for identification of patients with symmetrical knee biomechanics. Study Design: Cross-sectional study. Level of Evidence: Level 3. Methods: Thirty-one subjects (18 women; time since ACL reconstruction = 284.4 ± 53.6 days) who underwent ACL reconstruction and were to return to activity were recruited. Participants completed bilateral assessments of isokinetic quadriceps strength, quadriceps activation using the superimposed burst technique, and biomechanical function testing during a single-leg forward hop. The International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) subjective knee form was also completed. Symmetry values were calculated for each variable. Decision trees were utilized to determine which input factors (quadriceps strength symmetry, quadriceps activation symmetry, IKDC score, age, sex, height, mass, graft type) were able to identify participants who had symmetrical knee flexion angles (KFAs) and extension moments. Angles and moments were considered symmetrical if symmetry values were ≥90%. Results: Quadriceps strength and activation symmetry were able to predict whether a patient landed with symmetrical or asymmetrical KFAs, with thresholds of 77.2% strength symmetry and 91.3% activation symmetry being established. Patient-reported function and quadriceps strength were factors that allowed for classification of participants with symmetrical/asymmetrical knee extension moments, with thresholds of 89.1 for the IKDC and 80.0% for quadriceps strength symmetry. Conclusions: Quadriceps strength contributed to both models and appears to be a critical factor for achieving symmetrical knee biomechanics. High patient-reported function and quadriceps activation are also important for restoring knee biomechanical symmetry after ACL reconstruction. Clinical Relevance: Quadriceps strength and activation and patient-reported function may be able to assist clinicians in identifying ACL patients with symmetrical/asymmetrical knee biomechanics.


2011 ◽  
Vol 43 (Suppl 1) ◽  
pp. 807
Author(s):  
Liang-Ching Tsai ◽  
David G. Joiner ◽  
Christopher M. Powers

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yuan Yang ◽  
Kang Chen ◽  
Wenzhe Feng ◽  
Weimin Zhu ◽  
Yuxiao Lai

Abstract Background To illustrate a novel technique of treating anterior cruciate ligament injury. Methods If the ACL stump is strong enough and of good quality, we combine the ACL reconstruction and repair together. Results It is assumed that this will be better for the knee biomechanics in contrast to the simple reconstruction. This technique may also save the graft. That means we can only harvest one tendon gracilis or semitendinosus to satisfy the need of the knee stability. Conclusions This technique of combining the reconstruction and repair protects the knee proprioceptive feelings, accelerate the revascularization and strengthen the reconstructed ACL. This technique may also save the ligament graft and avoid the complications of the donor site. We are looking forward to comparing the outcomes of this technique to the outcomes of simple ACL reconstruction.


2021 ◽  
Vol 49 (5) ◽  
pp. 1279-1285
Author(s):  
Yusuke Sasaki ◽  
Masataka Fujii ◽  
Daisuke Araki ◽  
Brandon D. Marshall ◽  
Monica A. Linde ◽  
...  

Background: Previous studies have stated that closely matching the size of the anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) insertion site footprint is important for biomechanical function and clinical stability after ACL reconstruction. However, the ACL varies widely regarding the area of femoral insertion, tibial insertion, and midsubstance of ACL, and reconstructing the insertion site area with a uniform diameter graft can result in a cross-sectional area that is greater than that of the midsubstance of the native ACL. Therefore, understanding the effect of relative graft size in ACL reconstruction on knee biomechanics is important for surgical planning. Purpose: To assess how the percentage of femoral insertion site affects knee biomechanics in single- and double-bundle ACL reconstruction. Study Design: Controlled laboratory study. Methods: A total of 14 human cadaveric knees were scanned with magnetic resonance imaging and tested using a robotic system under an anterior tibial load and a combined rotational load. In total, 7 knee states were evaluated: intact ACL; deficient ACL; single-bundle ACL reconstruction with approximate graft sizes 25% (small), 50% (medium), and 75% (large) of the femoral insertion site; and double-bundle reconstruction of approximately 50% (medium) and 75% (large) of the femoral insertion site, based on the ratio of the cross-sectional area of the graft to the area of the femoral ACL insertion site determined by magnetic resonance imaging. Results: Anterior tibial translation was not significantly larger than the intact state in single-bundle and double-bundle medium graft reconstructions ( P > .05) and was significantly greater in the single-bundle small graft reconstruction ( P < .05). Anterior knee translation in single-bundle medium graft and large graft reconstructions was not statistically different ( P > .05). In contrast, the anterior tibial translation for double-bundle large graft reconstruction was significantly smaller than for double-bundle medium graft reconstruction at low flexion angles ( P < .05). The single-bundle small graft force was significantly different from the intact ACL in situ force ( P < .05). The graft force with double-bundle large reconstruction was significantly greater than that with the double-bundle medium reconstruction ( P < .05) but was not significantly different from that of the intact ACL ( P > .05). Conclusion: Knee biomechanics with a single-bundle small graft tended to be significantly different from those of the intact knee. In the kinematic and kinetic data for the single- and double-bundle medium graft reconstruction, only the anterior translation at full extension for the single-bundle reconstruction was significantly different (lower) from that of intact knee. This was a time zero study. Clinical Relevance: This study can provide surgeons with guidance in selecting the graft size for ACL reconstruction.


2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yuan Yang ◽  
Weimin Zhu ◽  
Yuxiao Lai ◽  
Kang Chen ◽  
Wenzhe Feng

Abstract If the ACL stump is strong enough and of good quality, we combine the ACL reconstruction and repair together. The main aim of this technique is to retain the autologous ACL stump to protect the proprioception and accelerate the revascularization and may even promote the healing of the bone to tendon. It is assumed that this will be better for the knee biomechanics in contrast to the simple reconstruction. This technique may also save the graft. That means we can only harvest one tendon gracilis or semitendinosus to satisfy the need of the knee stability.


2019 ◽  
Vol 28 (2) ◽  
pp. 614-621 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yongtao Mao ◽  
Brandon Marshall ◽  
Taylor Price ◽  
Monica Linde ◽  
Patrick Smolinski ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document