PURPOSE: Rotational knee laxity is an important measure in restoring knee stability following anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injury, but is difficult to quantify with current clinical tools. The hypothesis of the study is that there is greater tibial rotation (TR) in women than men, and also in ACL-deficient than healthy knees. METHODS: Sixteen healthy (8 men, 26.8 ± 6.4 years; 8 women, 26.9 ± 3.8 years) and ten ACL-deficient (5 men, 33.6 ± 10.5 years; 5 women, 36.3 ± 10.7 years) subjects received bilateral knee MRI in 15° of flexion using a custom device to apply a constant axial compressive load (44 N). A rotational torque (3.35 Nm) was sequentially applied to obtain images at internal and external rotation positions. T (2)-weighted images were acquired in internal and external rotation. Images were segmented and TR was calculated. To assess reproducibility, six knees were scanned twice on separate days. Group comparisons were made with unpaired t tests, while intrasubject comparisons were made using paired t tests. RESULTS: Healthy women demonstrated greater TR than men (13.6° ± 4.7° vs. 8.3° ± 3.6°; P = 0.001). Male ACL-deficient knees showed greater TR than the contralateral knee (15.7° ± 6.9° vs. 7.7° ± 5.6°; P = 0.003), and compared to male controls (P = 0.002). ACL-deficient women showed greater TR compared to their contralateral leg (15.1° ± 2.3° vs. 10.0° ± 4.3°; P = 0.01). The intraclass correlation coefficient of the TR measurement was 0.913, and the SEM = 1.1°. CONCLUSIONS: Kinematic MRI is a reproducible method to quantify total knee rotation. Women have more rotational laxity than men, particularly in the external rotation position. ACL rupture leads to increased rotational laxity of the knee. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Retrospective case-control series, Level III.
PURPOSE: Rotational knee laxity is an important measure in restoring knee stability following anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injury, but is difficult to quantify with current clinical tools. The hypothesis of the study is that there is greater tibial rotation (TR) in women than men, and also in ACL-deficient than healthy knees. METHODS: Sixteen healthy (8 men, 26.8 ± 6.4 years; 8 women, 26.9 ± 3.8 years) and ten ACL-deficient (5 men, 33.6 ± 10.5 years; 5 women, 36.3 ± 10.7 years) subjects received bilateral knee MRI in 15° of flexion using a custom device to apply a constant axial compressive load (44 N). A rotational torque (3.35 Nm) was sequentially applied to obtain images at internal and external rotation positions. T (2)-weighted images were acquired in internal and external rotation. Images were segmented and TR was calculated. To assess reproducibility, six knees were scanned twice on separate days. Group comparisons were made with unpaired t tests, while intrasubject comparisons were made using paired t tests. RESULTS: Healthy women demonstrated greater TR than men (13.6° ± 4.7° vs. 8.3° ± 3.6°; P = 0.001). Male ACL-deficient knees showed greater TR than the contralateral knee (15.7° ± 6.9° vs. 7.7° ± 5.6°; P = 0.003), and compared to male controls (P = 0.002). ACL-deficientwomen showed greater TR compared to their contralateral leg (15.1° ± 2.3° vs. 10.0° ± 4.3°; P = 0.01). The intraclass correlation coefficient of the TR measurement was 0.913, and the SEM = 1.1°. CONCLUSIONS: Kinematic MRI is a reproducible method to quantify total knee rotation. Women have more rotational laxity than men, particularly in the external rotation position. ACL rupture leads to increased rotational laxity of the knee. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Retrospective case-control series, Level III.
Authors: Asheesh Bedi; Volker Musahl; Volker Steuber; Daniel Kendoff; Dan Choi; Answorth A Allen; Andrew D Pearle; David W Altchek Journal: Arthroscopy Date: 2010-10-29 Impact factor: 4.772
Authors: Jae Doo Yoo; Ramprasad Papannagari; Sang Eun Park; Louis E DeFrate; Thomas J Gill; Guoan Li Journal: Am J Sports Med Date: 2005-02 Impact factor: 6.202
Authors: Paolo Aglietti; Francesco Giron; Michele Losco; Pierluigi Cuomo; Antonio Ciardullo; Nicola Mondanelli Journal: Am J Sports Med Date: 2009-09-30 Impact factor: 6.202
Authors: E S Abebe; G M Utturkar; D C Taylor; C E Spritzer; J P Kim; C T Moorman; W E Garrett; L E DeFrate Journal: J Biomech Date: 2011-01-11 Impact factor: 2.712
Authors: Andrew G Tsai; Volker Musahl; Hanno Steckel; Kevin M Bell; Thore Zantop; James J Irrgang; Freddie H Fu Journal: BMC Musculoskelet Disord Date: 2008-03-18 Impact factor: 2.362
Authors: Floor M van Diek; Megan R Wolf; Christopher D Murawski; Carola F van Eck; Freddie H Fu Journal: Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc Date: 2013-07-06 Impact factor: 4.342
Authors: Marc Garetier; Bhushan Borotikar; Karim Makki; Sylvain Brochard; François Rousseau; Douraïed Ben Salem Journal: Insights Imaging Date: 2020-05-19