Literature DB >> 12063323

The effectiveness of reconstruction of the anterior cruciate ligament with hamstrings and patellar tendon . A cadaveric study comparing anterior tibial and rotational loads.

Savio L-Y Woo1, Akihiro Kanamori, Jennifer Zeminski, Masayoshi Yagi, Christos Papageorgiou, Freddie H Fu.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The objective of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of reconstructions of the anterior cruciate ligament to resist anterior tibial and rotational loads. We hypothesized that current reconstruction techniques, which are designed mainly to provide resistance to anterior tibial loads, are less effective in limiting knee instability in response to combined rotational loads.
METHODS: Twelve fresh-frozen young human cadaveric knees (from individuals with a mean age [and standard deviation] of 37 +/- 13 years at the time of death) were tested with use of a robotic/universal force-moment sensor testing system. The loading conditions included (1) a 134-N anterior tibial load with the knee at full extension and at 15 degrees, 30 degrees, and 90 degrees of flexion, and (2) a combined rotational load of 10 N-m of valgus torque and 10 N-m of internal tibial torque with the knee at 15 degrees and 30 degrees of flexion. The kinematics of the knees with an intact and a deficient anterior cruciate ligament, as well as the in situ force in the intact anterior cruciate ligament, were determined in response to both loads. Each knee then underwent reconstruction of the anterior cruciate ligament with use of a quadruple semitendinosus-gracilis tendon graft and was tested. A second reconstruction was performed with a bone-patellar tendon-bone graft, and the same knee was tested again. The kinematics of the reconstructed knees and the in situ forces in both grafts were determined.
RESULTS: The results demonstrated that both reconstructions were successful in limiting anterior tibial translation under anterior tibial loads. Furthermore, the mean in situ forces in the grafts under a 134-N anterior tibial load were restored to within 78% to 100% of that in the intact knee. However, in response to a combined rotational load, reconstruction with either of the two grafts was not as effective in reducing anterior tibial translation. This insufficiency was further revealed by the lower in situ forces in the grafts, which ranged from 45% to 65% of that in the intact knee.
CONCLUSIONS: In current reconstruction procedures, the graft is placed close to the central axis of the tibia and femur, which makes it inadequate for resisting rotational loads. Our findings suggest that improved reconstruction procedures that restore the anatomy of the anterior cruciate ligament may be needed.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2002        PMID: 12063323     DOI: 10.2106/00004623-200206000-00003

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am        ISSN: 0021-9355            Impact factor:   5.284


  115 in total

1.  Anteroposterior stability of the knee during the stance phase of gait after anterior cruciate ligament deficiency.

Authors:  Chih-Hui Chen; Jing-Sheng Li; Ali Hosseini; Hemanth R Gadikota; Thomas J Gill; Guoan Li
Journal:  Gait Posture       Date:  2011-12-12       Impact factor: 2.840

2.  The effects of anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction on tibial rotation during pivoting after descending stairs.

Authors:  S Ristanis; G Giakas; C D Papageorgiou; T Moraiti; N Stergiou; A D Georgoulis
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2003-10-03       Impact factor: 4.342

3.  The effect of tunnel placement on rotational stability after ACL reconstruction: evaluation with use of triaxial accelerometry in a porcine model.

Authors:  Aníbal Debandi; Akira Maeyama; Yuichi Hoshino; Shigehiro Asai; Bunsei Goto; Patrick Smolinski; Freddie H Fu
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2012-03-23       Impact factor: 4.342

Review 4.  Double-bundle reconstruction results in superior clinical outcome than single-bundle reconstruction.

Authors:  Ying Zhu; Ren-Kuan Tang; Peng Zhao; Shi-Sheng Zhu; Yong-Guo Li; Jian-Bo Li
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2012-06-07       Impact factor: 4.342

5.  A prospective randomised study of anatomical single-bundle versus double-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: quantitative evaluation using an electromagnetic measurement system.

Authors:  Daisuke Araki; Ryosuke Kuroda; Seiji Kubo; Norifumi Fujita; Katsumasa Tei; Koji Nishimoto; Yuichi Hoshino; Takehiko Matsushita; Tomoyuki Matsumoto; Koki Nagamune; Masahiro Kurosaka
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2010-08-24       Impact factor: 3.075

6.  Biomechanical comparison of three anatomic ACL reconstructions in a porcine model.

Authors:  Aníbal Debandi; Akira Maeyama; Songcen Lu; Chad Hume; Shigehiro Asai; Bunsei Goto; Yuichi Hoshino; Patrick Smolinski; Freddie H Fu
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2010-12-11       Impact factor: 4.342

7.  Comparative risk of common peroneal nerve injury in far anteromedial portal drilling and transtibial drilling in anatomical double-bundle ACL reconstruction.

Authors:  M Otani; M Nozaki; M Kobayashi; H Goto; K Tawada; Y Waguri-Nagaya; H Okamoto; H Iguchi; N Watanabe; T Otsuka
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2011-08-10       Impact factor: 4.342

Review 8.  Failure of Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction.

Authors:  Gonzalo Samitier; Alejandro I Marcano; Eduard Alentorn-Geli; Ramon Cugat; Kevin W Farmer; Michael W Moser
Journal:  Arch Bone Jt Surg       Date:  2015-10

Review 9.  Femoral attachment of the anterior cruciate ligament.

Authors:  Francesco Giron; Pierluigi Cuomo; Paolo Aglietti; Anthony M J Bull; Andrew A Amis
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2005-11-10       Impact factor: 4.342

10.  Ligament Injury, Reconstruction and Osteoarthritis.

Authors:  Braden C Fleming; Michael J Hulstyn; Heidi L Oksendahl; Paul D Fadale
Journal:  Curr Opin Orthop       Date:  2005-10
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.