Anterior knee translation measurements after ACL reconstruction are influenced by the type of laximeter used

Purpose Laximeters were designed to diagnose an anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) deficient knee, but their use has now focused on providing an objective assessment of the anterior translation (AT) of an intact and ACL-reconstructed knee. In this study we report the introduction and direct comparison...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Knee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA, 2020-11, Vol.28 (11), p.3639-3646
Hauptverfasser: Klasan, Antonio, Putnis, Sven Edward, Kandhari, Vikram, Oshima, Takeshi, Parker, David Anthony
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:Purpose Laximeters were designed to diagnose an anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) deficient knee, but their use has now focused on providing an objective assessment of the anterior translation (AT) of an intact and ACL-reconstructed knee. In this study we report the introduction and direct comparison of an automated and computerized AT measurement device, GNRB, with the device previously established by the institute and as the current literature standard, the KT1000. Methods A prospective data collection was commenced upon introduction of the GNRB. The measurements of AT in each patient were performed by the same investigator with each device using 134 N applied to both knees, giving a side-to-side difference. The investigators were a sport scientist, a biomechanical engineer and a physiotherapist. Increased AT was defined as a difference > 3 mm. Results Three investigators performed the measurements in 122 patients, 9.8 (± 1.8) months after ACL reconstruction. Mean AT of the healthy knee was 5.7 mm with KT1000 and 4.4 mm with GNRB ( p  = 0.002). Mean AT of the ACL reconstructed knee was 7.0 mm with the KT1000 and 5.3 mm with the GNRB ( p  = 0.037). The KT1000 had a higher variance of results than the GNRB ( p  
ISSN:0942-2056
1433-7347
DOI:10.1007/s00167-020-05950-5