Literature DB >> 15711494

[Reliability of the KT-1000 arthrometer (Medmetric) for measuring anterior knee laxity: comparison with Telos in 147 knees].

P Boyer1, P Djian, P Christel, X Paoletti, R Degeorges.   

Abstract

PURPOSE OF THE STUDY: The purpose of this study was to compare the reliability and the reproducibility of both the KT-1000 arthrometer (Medmetric) and Telos for measuring anterior knee laxity. The Telos was used as the reference technique.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: Criteria for inclusion were preoperative anterior knee laxity, normal contralateral knee, and intra-articular surgery to reconstruct the anterior cruciate ligament. Between January 1st, 2000 and October 31st, 2001, 147 patients were operated on for knee instability using an autograft (BPTB or hamstring tendons). For each patient, comparative measurements were made for both knees preoperatively and postoperatively with an average follow-up of 16 months. Measurements with the KT-1000 apparatus were made with forces of 67 N, 89 N, 134 N and manual maximal force. For the Telos, a force of 250 N was used as recommended by the manufacturer. We also evaluated intraobserver variation between the two devices.
RESULTS: The anterior translation preoperatively as measured by the KT-1000 at 89N was 4.2 +/- 2.4 mm and 6.3 +/- 2.5 mm at maximal manual force. The result for Telos was 3.0 +/- 3.6 mm. The data scatter obtained with Telos was wider than with KT-1000 (p<0.03). The sensitivity of Telos was 72% with 28% false negatives. With KT-1000, sensitivity increased as tensile force increased. Sensitivity was 65% at 89N, 73% at 134N and 92% at maximal manual force. The concordance between the KT1000 and Telos data was low for either preoperative (10%) or postoperative (30%) measurements. DISCUSSION AND
CONCLUSION: In this study, the results of sensitivity and reproducibility as well as the minimal scatter of the values demonstrated the reliability of KT-1000 for measuring anterior translation of the knee. We recommend routine use of the KT-1000 device for measuring knee laxity. The low sensitivity and the high rate of false negative observed with Telos raises the question of its use a reference technique.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2004        PMID: 15711494     DOI: 10.1016/s0035-1040(04)70756-4

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Rev Chir Orthop Reparatrice Appar Mot        ISSN: 0035-1040


  18 in total

1.  Objective evaluation of anterior knee laxity; comparison of the KT-1000 and GNRB® arthrometers.

Authors:  Michel Collette; Julie Courville; Marc Forton; Bertrand Gagnière
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2012-01-10       Impact factor: 4.342

2.  New intraoperative protocol for kinematic evaluation of ACL reconstruction: preliminary results.

Authors:  S Zaffagnini; S Bignozzi; S Martelli; N Imakiire; N Lopomo; M Marcacci
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2006-05-04       Impact factor: 4.342

3.  Stress radiography to measure posterior cruciate ligament insufficiency: a comparison of five different techniques.

Authors:  Tobias M Jung; Carsten Reinhardt; Sven U Scheffler; Andreas Weiler
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2006-06-24       Impact factor: 4.342

4.  Intraoperative evaluation of total knee replacement: kinematic assessment with a navigation system.

Authors:  Daniela Casino; Stefano Zaffagnini; Sandra Martelli; Nicola Lopomo; Simone Bignozzi; Francesco Iacono; Alessandro Russo; Maurilio Marcacci
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2008-12-20       Impact factor: 4.342

5.  Static rotational and sagittal knee laxity measurements after reconstruction of the anterior cruciate ligament.

Authors:  O Lorbach; M Kieb; P Brogard; S Maas; D Pape; R Seil
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2011-08-03       Impact factor: 4.342

6.  Methods to diagnose acute anterior cruciate ligament rupture: a meta-analysis of instrumented knee laxity tests.

Authors:  Carola F van Eck; Miette Loopik; Michel P van den Bekerom; Freddie H Fu; Gino M M J Kerkhoffs
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2012-10-17       Impact factor: 4.342

7.  Smartphone versus knee ligament arthrometer when size does not matter.

Authors:  Andrea Ferretti; Ferretti Andrea; Luigi Valeo; Valeo Luigi; Daniele Mazza; Mazza Daniele; Luca Muliere; Muliere Luca; Paolo Iorio; Iorio Paolo; Giovanni Giovannetti; Giovannetti Giovanni; Fabio Conteduca; Conteduca Fabio; Raffaele Iorio; Iorio Raffaele
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2014-07-09       Impact factor: 3.075

Review 8.  Objective measurement devices to assess static rotational knee laxity: focus on the Rotameter.

Authors:  Olaf Lorbach; Matthias Brockmeyer; Matthias Kieb; Tina Zerbe; Dietrich Pape; Romain Seil
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2012-01-14       Impact factor: 4.342

9.  Prospective comparative study of knee laxity with four different methods in anterior cruciate ligament tears.

Authors:  Jerome Murgier; Jean Sebastien Béranger; Philippe Boisrenoult; Camille Steltzlen; Nicolas Pujol
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2018-02-02       Impact factor: 3.075

10.  Assessment of rotatory laxity in anterior cruciate ligament-deficient knees using magnetic resonance imaging with Porto-knee testing device.

Authors:  João Espregueira-Mendes; Hélder Pereira; Nuno Sevivas; Cláudia Passos; José C Vasconcelos; Alberto Monteiro; Joaquim M Oliveira; Rui L Reis
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2012-04       Impact factor: 4.342

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.