Literature DB >> 22682232

Arthrometric curve-shape variables to assess anterior cruciate ligament deficiency.

Samuel C Wordeman1, Mark V Paterno, Carmen E Quatman, Nathaniel A Bates, Timothy E Hewett.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Instrumented measurement of asymmetry in anterior-posterior knee laxity is commonly used to assess anterior cruciate ligament integrity. Significant advances in arthrometric technology and data visualization have occurred since first generation arthrometers. However, little has changed with regard to diagnostic criteria employed. To our knowledge, no investigations have assessed the shape of laxity curves to diagnose anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) deficiency. We hypothesized that linear stiffness and compliance after positive curve inflection would be more sensitive and specific to anterior cruciate ligament injury than current measures and would require data from the involved limb only.
METHODS: Laxity curves were obtained from 130 knees on 65 subjects (Anterior Cruciate Injured n=15, Controls n=50) using a CompuKT Knee Ligament Arthrometer. Traditional diagnostic variables and novel descriptive curve-shape variables [(1) inflection point, (2) pre- and post-inflection linear stiffness and (3) a modified compliance index based on the post-inflection linear stiffness] were assessed for sensitivity to anterior cruciate ligament deficiency. Statistical interactions were evaluated using 2-by-2 ANOVA.
FINDINGS: Significant interactions (P<0.001) were identified for laxity symmetry, stiffness, compliance index and modified compliance index. Modified compliance index predicted anterior cruciate ligament deficiency with the highest sensitivity (93%) and specificity (100%). For a test performed on a single limb, modified compliance index demonstrated 98% sensitivity and 80% specificity.
INTERPRETATION: The modified compliance index is a highly sensitive and specific measure to diagnose anterior cruciate ligament deficiency, and may serve as a simple and accurate diagnostic tool for individuals without a healthy contralateral limb.
Copyright © 2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22682232      PMCID: PMC3423577          DOI: 10.1016/j.clinbiomech.2012.04.011

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon)        ISSN: 0268-0033            Impact factor:   2.063


  27 in total

1.  Rate of force application during knee arthrometer testing affects stiffness but not displacement measurements.

Authors:  Steven M Gross; Christopher R Carcia; Bruce M Gansneder; Sandra J Shultz
Journal:  J Orthop Sports Phys Ther       Date:  2004-03       Impact factor: 4.751

2.  Is the KT1000 knee ligament arthrometer reliable?

Authors:  I W Forster; C D Warren-Smith; M Tew
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Br       Date:  1989-11

3.  Reliability of measuring anterior laxity of the knee joint using a knee ligament arthrometer.

Authors:  W P Hanten; M B Pace
Journal:  Phys Ther       Date:  1987-03

4.  Reproducibility of Genucom knee analysis system testing.

Authors:  R R Wroble; E S Grood; F R Noyes; D J Schmitt
Journal:  Am J Sports Med       Date:  1990 Jul-Aug       Impact factor: 6.202

5.  Instrumented measurement of anterior laxity of the knee.

Authors:  D M Daniel; L L Malcom; G Losse; M L Stone; R Sachs; R Burks
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am       Date:  1985-06       Impact factor: 5.284

6.  Instrumented measurement of anterior knee laxity in patients with acute anterior cruciate ligament disruption.

Authors:  D M Daniel; M L Stone; R Sachs; L Malcom
Journal:  Am J Sports Med       Date:  1985 Nov-Dec       Impact factor: 6.202

7.  Ligamentous restraints to anterior-posterior drawer in the human knee. A biomechanical study.

Authors:  D L Butler; F R Noyes; E S Grood
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am       Date:  1980-03       Impact factor: 5.284

8.  Preoperative instrumented testing of anterior and posterior knee laxity.

Authors:  A F Anderson; A B Lipscomb
Journal:  Am J Sports Med       Date:  1989 May-Jun       Impact factor: 6.202

9.  A modeling study of partial ACL injury: simulated KT-2000 arthrometer tests.

Authors:  Wen Liu; Murray E Maitland; G Douglas Bell
Journal:  J Biomech Eng       Date:  2002-06       Impact factor: 2.097

10.  Exercise-related knee joint laxity.

Authors:  H B Skinner; M P Wyatt; M L Stone; J A Hodgdon; R L Barrack
Journal:  Am J Sports Med       Date:  1986 Jan-Feb       Impact factor: 6.202

View more
  5 in total

1.  Influence of relative injury risk profiles on anterior cruciate ligament and medial collateral ligament strain during simulated landing leading to a noncontact injury event.

Authors:  Nathaniel A Bates; Nathan D Schilaty; Aaron J Krych; Timothy E Hewett
Journal:  Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon)       Date:  2019-07-03       Impact factor: 2.063

Review 2.  Anterior cruciate ligament assessment using arthrometry and stress imaging.

Authors:  Eric M Rohman; Jeffrey A Macalena
Journal:  Curr Rev Musculoskelet Med       Date:  2016-06

Review 3.  Mechanisms, prediction, and prevention of ACL injuries: Cut risk with three sharpened and validated tools.

Authors:  Timothy E Hewett; Gregory D Myer; Kevin R Ford; Mark V Paterno; Carmen E Quatman
Journal:  J Orthop Res       Date:  2016-09-19       Impact factor: 3.494

4.  Diagnostic value of knee arthrometry in the prediction of anterior cruciate ligament strain during landing.

Authors:  Ata M Kiapour; Samuel C Wordeman; Mark V Paterno; Carmen E Quatman; Jason W Levine; Vijay K Goel; Constantine K Demetropoulos; Timothy E Hewett
Journal:  Am J Sports Med       Date:  2013-11-25       Impact factor: 6.202

5.  Clinical Factors That Predict a Second ACL Injury After ACL Reconstruction and Return to Sport: Preliminary Development of a Clinical Decision Algorithm.

Authors:  Mark V Paterno; Bin Huang; Staci Thomas; Timothy E Hewett; Laura C Schmitt
Journal:  Orthop J Sports Med       Date:  2017-12-19
  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.