Rotational laxity after anatomical ACL reconstruction measured by 3-D motion analysis: a prospective randomized clinical trial comparing anatomic and nonanatomic ACL reconstruction techniques

TY - JOUR

T1 - Rotational laxity after anatomical ACL reconstruction measured by 3-D motion analysis

T2 - a prospective randomized clinical trial comparing anatomic and nonanatomic ACL reconstruction techniques

AU - Bohn, Marie Bagger

AU - Sørensen, Henrik

AU - Petersen, Annemette Krintel

AU - Søballe, Kjeld

AU - Lind, Martin

PY - 2015/12

Y1 - 2015/12

N2 - PURPOSE: To compare the ability of three different anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction techniques to normalize rotational knee stability 1 year after ACL reconstruction. Two of these techniques are so-called anatomic techniques.METHODS: Three different ACL reconstruction techniques were tested for their ability to normalize rotational knee stability in a prospective randomized study. Forty-seven ACL-deficient (ACLD) patients were randomized to transtibial single-bundle (SB), anatomic SB, and double-bundle ACL reconstruction. Three-dimensional motion analysis was performed preoperatively and at 1-year follow-up to evaluate tibial rotation and rotational stiffness. Motion data were captured using an eight-camera motion analysis system. Tibial rotation was determined during walking, running, and a pivoting task. Other outcome parameters were KT-1000 knee laxity measurements and the subjective outcome scores KOOS and IKDC.RESULTS: Three-dimensional motion analysis demonstrated that the tibial internal rotation and the rotational stiffness did not differ between the ACL reconstruction techniques during walking, running, and pivoting at 1-year follow-up. Objective knee stability and subjective outcome scores did not differ between the reconstruction groups.CONCLUSION: No significant difference in rotational stability walking, running, and pivoting was seen between anatomic and nonanatomic ACL reconstruction techniques at 1-year follow-up.LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic study, Level I.

AB - PURPOSE: To compare the ability of three different anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction techniques to normalize rotational knee stability 1 year after ACL reconstruction. Two of these techniques are so-called anatomic techniques.METHODS: Three different ACL reconstruction techniques were tested for their ability to normalize rotational knee stability in a prospective randomized study. Forty-seven ACL-deficient (ACLD) patients were randomized to transtibial single-bundle (SB), anatomic SB, and double-bundle ACL reconstruction. Three-dimensional motion analysis was performed preoperatively and at 1-year follow-up to evaluate tibial rotation and rotational stiffness. Motion data were captured using an eight-camera motion analysis system. Tibial rotation was determined during walking, running, and a pivoting task. Other outcome parameters were KT-1000 knee laxity measurements and the subjective outcome scores KOOS and IKDC.RESULTS: Three-dimensional motion analysis demonstrated that the tibial internal rotation and the rotational stiffness did not differ between the ACL reconstruction techniques during walking, running, and pivoting at 1-year follow-up. Objective knee stability and subjective outcome scores did not differ between the reconstruction groups.CONCLUSION: No significant difference in rotational stability walking, running, and pivoting was seen between anatomic and nonanatomic ACL reconstruction techniques at 1-year follow-up.LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic study, Level I.

U2 - 10.1007/s00167-014-3156-5

DO - 10.1007/s00167-014-3156-5

M3 - Journal article

C2 - 24993569

SN - 0942-2056

JO - Knee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA

JF - Knee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA

ER -