In this section
@article{Inderhaug:2016:10.1177/0363546516681555,
author = {Inderhaug, E and Stephen, JM and Williams, A and Amis, AA},
doi = {10.1177/0363546516681555},
journal = {American Journal of Sports Medicine},
pages = {347--354},
title = {Biomechanical Comparison of Anterolateral Procedures Combined With Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction},
url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0363546516681555},
volume = {45},
year = {2016}
}
TY - JOUR
AB - Background: Anterolateral soft tissue structures of the knee have a role in controlling anterolateral rotational laxity, and they maybe damaged at the time of anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) ruptures.Purpose: To compare the kinematic effects of anterolateral operative procedures in combination with intra-articular ACL reconstructionfor combined ACL plus anterolateral–injured knees.Study Design: Controlled laboratory study.Methods: Twelve cadaveric knees were tested in a 6 degrees of freedom rig using an optical tracking system to record the kinematicsthrough 0 to 90 of knee flexion with no load, anterior drawer, internal rotation, and combined loading. Testing was firstperformed in ACL-intact, ACL-deficient, and combined ACL plus anterolateral–injured (distal deep insertions of the iliotibial bandand the anterolateral ligament [ALL] and capsule cut) states. Thereafter, ACL reconstruction was performed alone and in combinationwith the following: modified MacIntosh tenodesis, modified Lemaire tenodesis passed both superficial and deep to thelateral collateral ligament, and ALL reconstruction. Anterolateral grafts were fixed at 30 of knee flexion with both 20 and 40 Nof tension. Statistical analysis used repeated-measures analyses of variance and paired t tests with Bonferroni adjustments.Results: ACL reconstruction alone failed to restore native knee kinematics in combined ACL plus anterolateral–injured knees (P\.05 for all). All combined reconstructions with 20 N of tension, except for ALL reconstruction (P 5 .002-.01), restored anteriortranslation. With 40 N of tension, the superficial Lemaire and MacIntosh procedures overconstrained the anterior laxity in deepflexion. Only the deep Lemaire and MacIntosh procedures—with 20 N of tension—restored rotational kinematics to the intactstate (P . .05 for all), while the ALL underconstrained and the superficial Lemaire overconstrained internal rotation. The sameprocedures with 40 N of tension
AU - Inderhaug,E
AU - Stephen,JM
AU - Williams,A
AU - Amis,AA
DO - 10.1177/0363546516681555
EP - 354
PY - 2016///
SN - 0363-5465
SP - 347
TI - Biomechanical Comparison of Anterolateral Procedures Combined With Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction
T2 - American Journal of Sports Medicine
UR - http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0363546516681555
UR - http://gateway.webofknowledge.com/gateway/Gateway.cgi?GWVersion=2&SrcApp=PARTNER_APP&SrcAuth=LinksAMR&KeyUT=WOS:000394776900011&DestLinkType=FullRecord&DestApp=ALL_WOS&UsrCustomerID=1ba7043ffcc86c417c072aa74d649202
UR - http://hdl.handle.net/10044/1/49991
VL - 45
ER -
The Biomechanics Group
Mechanical Engineering
Imperial College London
South Kensington Campus
City & Guilds Building
Exhibition Road
London SW7 2AZ
+44 (0) 20 7589 5111