Literature DB >> 31813701

Anterior cruciate ligament repair versus reconstruction: A kinematic analysis.

Jorge Chahla1, Trevor Nelson2, Ignacio Dallo3, Dheeraj Yalamanchili4, Sam Eberlein2, Orr Limpisvasti1, Bert Mandelbaum1, Melodie F Metzger2.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to compare the biomechanical properties of an anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) anatomic repair of a true femoral avulsion to an anatomic ACL reconstruction. It was hypothesized that the ACL repair and ACL reconstruction would have comparable biomechanical behavior when compared to the native knee.
METHODS: Ten paired fresh-frozen cadaveric knees (n = 20) were used to investigate knee kinematics when an anterior drawer force, varus, valgus, internal, and external rotational moment were applied at 0, 15, 30, 45, 60, and 90 degrees of flexion. Displacement and rotation were recorded in the following conditions: ACL-intact, ACL-deficient, and ACL-repaired vs reconstructed.
RESULTS: Sectioning of the ACL significantly increased anterior tibial translation (0°, 15°, 30° and 45°) compared to the intact state. The mean anterior displacement difference from intact was lower in the ACL-repaired knees compared to reconstructed knees at 30° and 90°. There were no significant differences between conditions in varus, valgus, internal, or external rotations.
CONCLUSION: ACL repair and ACL reconstruction procedures restored knee anterior tibial translation in matched paired specimens. There were no differences in valgus, varus, internal, or external rotation. Although, ACL-repaired knees (avulsion model) demonstrated less anterior tibial translation when compared to ACL-reconstructed knees, this difference was less than one millimeter. Based on the findings of this study, repair and reconstruction procedures both restored anterior tibial translation in matched-pair specimens. This suggests that the initial functionality of both techniques is similar and that further clinical studies are needed to compare the long-term stability.
Copyright © 2019 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  ACL reconstruction; ACL repair; Anterior cruciate ligament; Biomechanics

Year:  2019        PMID: 31813701     DOI: 10.1016/j.knee.2019.10.020

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Knee        ISSN: 0968-0160            Impact factor:   2.199


  3 in total

1.  Posterior Lateral Meniscal Root Tears Increase Strain on the Reconstructed Anterior Cruciate Ligament: A Cadaveric Study.

Authors:  William Uffmann; Neal ElAttrache; Trevor Nelson; Sam A Eberlein; Juntian Wang; Daniel R Howard; Melodie F Metzger
Journal:  Arthrosc Sports Med Rehabil       Date:  2021-02-03

2.  Suture Tape Augmentation Has No Effect on Anterior Tibial Translation, Gap Formation, or Load to Failure of Anterior Cruciate Ligament Repair: A Biomechanical Pilot Study.

Authors:  Charles Qin; Adam Kahn; Farid Amirouche; Amir Beltagi; Sonia Pradhan; Jason L Koh; Aravind Athiviraham
Journal:  Arthrosc Sports Med Rehabil       Date:  2021-01-11

3.  Anatomical repair and ligament bracing of Schenck III and IV knee joint dislocations leads to acceptable subjective and kinematic outcomes.

Authors:  Thomas Rosteius; Birger Jettkant; Valentin Rausch; Sebastian Lotzien; Matthias Königshausen; Thomas Armin Schildhauer; Dominik Seybold; Jan Geßmann
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2021-03-10       Impact factor: 4.342

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.