Biomechanical Analysis of a Double-Bundle Posterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction
The objective of this study was to experimentally evaluate a single-bundle versus a double-bundle posterior cruciate ligament reconstruction by comparing the resulting knee biomechanics with those of the intact knee. Ten human cadaveric knees were tested using a robotic/universal force-moment sensor...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | American journal of sports medicine 2000-03, Vol.28 (2), p.144-151 |
|---|---|
| Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | 151 |
|---|---|
| container_issue | 2 |
| container_start_page | 144 |
| container_title | American journal of sports medicine |
| container_volume | 28 |
| creator | Harner, Christopher D. Janaushek, Marsie A. Kanamori, Akihiro Yagi, Masayoshi Vogrin, Tracy M. Woo, Savio L-Y. |
| description | The objective of this study was to experimentally evaluate a single-bundle versus a double-bundle posterior cruciate ligament
reconstruction by comparing the resulting knee biomechanics with those of the intact knee. Ten human cadaveric knees were
tested using a robotic/universal force-moment sensor testing system. The knees were subjected to a 134-N posterior tibial
load at five flexion angles. Three knee conditions were tested: 1) intact knee, 2) single-bundle reconstruction, and 3) double-bundle
reconstruction. Posterior tibial translation of the intact knee ranged from 4.9 ± 2.7 mm at 90° to 7.2 ± 1.5 mm at full extension.
After the single-bundle reconstruction, posterior tibial translation increased to 7.3 ± 3.9 mm and 9.2 ± 2.8 mm at 90° and
full extension, respectively, while the corresponding in situ forces in the graft were up to 44 ± 19 N lower than those in
the intact ligament. Conversely, with double-bundle reconstruction, the posterior tibial translation did not differ significantly
from the intact knee at any flexion angle tested. This reconstruction also restored in situ forces more closely than did the
single-bundle reconstruction. These data suggest that a double-bundle posterior cruciate ligament reconstruction can more
closely restore the biomechanics of the intact knee than can the single-bundle reconstruction throughout the range of knee
flexion. |
| doi_str_mv | 10.1177/03635465000280020201 |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>gale_proqu</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_71017303</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><galeid>A63089353</galeid><sage_id>10.1177_03635465000280020201</sage_id><sourcerecordid>A63089353</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c565t-7b062f77a1c947ed27c52c89f13f77c6dd07ab6a3674d80b43dfb1fd912f6dfa3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqFkV2L1DAUhoMo7jj6D0SKqFfbNadpPno5O34tDKzIeh3SNJnJkDZr0qL77zelg4oISwiBw3POed-8CL0EfAHA-XtMGKE1oxjjSuSbDzxCK6C0Kglh9DFazUg5M2foWUrHTAJn4ik6A8wpboRYoZtLF3qjD2pwWvliMyh_l1wqgi1U8SFMrTfl5TR03hRfQxpNdCEW2zhpp0ZT7Nxe9WYYi29GhyGNuT66MDxHT6zyybw4vWv0_dPHm-2Xcnf9-Wq72ZWaMjqWvMWsspwr0E3NTVdxTSstGgskVzXrOsxVyxRhvO4EbmvS2RZs10BlWWcVWaN3y9zbGH5MJo2yd0kb79VgwpQkh2yYYPIgCKIBXANk8PU_4DFMMX9KkhVwzAQl87TzBdorb6QbsvXR_Bp18N7sjcwWt9dywwgWDaEzXi-4jiGlaKy8ja5X8U4ClnOU8n9R5rZXJylT25vur6Yluwy8OQEq5exsVIN26Q-X9_M8eI1gwZLK4n7beWD326Xn4PaHny4amXrlfVZCpDqmSshKQl2Tez2hvqY</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>217068533</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Biomechanical Analysis of a Double-Bundle Posterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>SAGE Complete A-Z List</source><source>Alma/SFX Local Collection</source><creator>Harner, Christopher D. ; Janaushek, Marsie A. ; Kanamori, Akihiro ; Yagi, Masayoshi ; Vogrin, Tracy M. ; Woo, Savio L-Y.</creator><creatorcontrib>Harner, Christopher D. ; Janaushek, Marsie A. ; Kanamori, Akihiro ; Yagi, Masayoshi ; Vogrin, Tracy M. ; Woo, Savio L-Y.</creatorcontrib><description>The objective of this study was to experimentally evaluate a single-bundle versus a double-bundle posterior cruciate ligament
reconstruction by comparing the resulting knee biomechanics with those of the intact knee. Ten human cadaveric knees were
tested using a robotic/universal force-moment sensor testing system. The knees were subjected to a 134-N posterior tibial
load at five flexion angles. Three knee conditions were tested: 1) intact knee, 2) single-bundle reconstruction, and 3) double-bundle
reconstruction. Posterior tibial translation of the intact knee ranged from 4.9 ± 2.7 mm at 90° to 7.2 ± 1.5 mm at full extension.
After the single-bundle reconstruction, posterior tibial translation increased to 7.3 ± 3.9 mm and 9.2 ± 2.8 mm at 90° and
full extension, respectively, while the corresponding in situ forces in the graft were up to 44 ± 19 N lower than those in
the intact ligament. Conversely, with double-bundle reconstruction, the posterior tibial translation did not differ significantly
from the intact knee at any flexion angle tested. This reconstruction also restored in situ forces more closely than did the
single-bundle reconstruction. These data suggest that a double-bundle posterior cruciate ligament reconstruction can more
closely restore the biomechanics of the intact knee than can the single-bundle reconstruction throughout the range of knee
flexion.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0363-5465</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1552-3365</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1177/03635465000280020201</identifier><identifier>PMID: 10750988</identifier><identifier>CODEN: AJSMDO</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Los Angeles, CA: American Orthopaedic Society for Sports Medicine</publisher><subject>Adult ; Aged ; Biological and medical sciences ; Biomechanical Phenomena ; Cruciate ligaments ; Flexibility ; Humans ; Knee ; Knee Injuries - physiopathology ; Knee Injuries - surgery ; Ligaments ; Medical procedures ; Medical sciences ; Methods ; Middle Aged ; Orthopedic Procedures ; Orthopedic surgery ; Posterior Cruciate Ligament - injuries ; Posterior Cruciate Ligament - surgery ; Reconstructive Surgical Procedures ; Rupture ; Sports medicine ; Surgery ; Surgery (general aspects). Transplantations, organ and tissue grafts. Graft diseases ; Tibia - physiopathology</subject><ispartof>American journal of sports medicine, 2000-03, Vol.28 (2), p.144-151</ispartof><rights>2000 American Orthopaedic Society for Sports Medicine</rights><rights>2000 INIST-CNRS</rights><rights>Copyright American Journal of Sports Medicine Mar/Apr 2000</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c565t-7b062f77a1c947ed27c52c89f13f77c6dd07ab6a3674d80b43dfb1fd912f6dfa3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c565t-7b062f77a1c947ed27c52c89f13f77c6dd07ab6a3674d80b43dfb1fd912f6dfa3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/03635465000280020201$$EPDF$$P50$$Gsage$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/03635465000280020201$$EHTML$$P50$$Gsage$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>309,310,314,780,784,789,790,21819,23930,23931,25140,27924,27925,43621,43622</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttp://pascal-francis.inist.fr/vibad/index.php?action=getRecordDetail&idt=1308736$$DView record in Pascal Francis$$Hfree_for_read</backlink><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10750988$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Harner, Christopher D.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Janaushek, Marsie A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kanamori, Akihiro</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Yagi, Masayoshi</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Vogrin, Tracy M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Woo, Savio L-Y.</creatorcontrib><title>Biomechanical Analysis of a Double-Bundle Posterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction</title><title>American journal of sports medicine</title><addtitle>Am J Sports Med</addtitle><description>The objective of this study was to experimentally evaluate a single-bundle versus a double-bundle posterior cruciate ligament
reconstruction by comparing the resulting knee biomechanics with those of the intact knee. Ten human cadaveric knees were
tested using a robotic/universal force-moment sensor testing system. The knees were subjected to a 134-N posterior tibial
load at five flexion angles. Three knee conditions were tested: 1) intact knee, 2) single-bundle reconstruction, and 3) double-bundle
reconstruction. Posterior tibial translation of the intact knee ranged from 4.9 ± 2.7 mm at 90° to 7.2 ± 1.5 mm at full extension.
After the single-bundle reconstruction, posterior tibial translation increased to 7.3 ± 3.9 mm and 9.2 ± 2.8 mm at 90° and
full extension, respectively, while the corresponding in situ forces in the graft were up to 44 ± 19 N lower than those in
the intact ligament. Conversely, with double-bundle reconstruction, the posterior tibial translation did not differ significantly
from the intact knee at any flexion angle tested. This reconstruction also restored in situ forces more closely than did the
single-bundle reconstruction. These data suggest that a double-bundle posterior cruciate ligament reconstruction can more
closely restore the biomechanics of the intact knee than can the single-bundle reconstruction throughout the range of knee
flexion.</description><subject>Adult</subject><subject>Aged</subject><subject>Biological and medical sciences</subject><subject>Biomechanical Phenomena</subject><subject>Cruciate ligaments</subject><subject>Flexibility</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Knee</subject><subject>Knee Injuries - physiopathology</subject><subject>Knee Injuries - surgery</subject><subject>Ligaments</subject><subject>Medical procedures</subject><subject>Medical sciences</subject><subject>Methods</subject><subject>Middle Aged</subject><subject>Orthopedic Procedures</subject><subject>Orthopedic surgery</subject><subject>Posterior Cruciate Ligament - injuries</subject><subject>Posterior Cruciate Ligament - surgery</subject><subject>Reconstructive Surgical Procedures</subject><subject>Rupture</subject><subject>Sports medicine</subject><subject>Surgery</subject><subject>Surgery (general aspects). Transplantations, organ and tissue grafts. Graft diseases</subject><subject>Tibia - physiopathology</subject><issn>0363-5465</issn><issn>1552-3365</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2000</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNqFkV2L1DAUhoMo7jj6D0SKqFfbNadpPno5O34tDKzIeh3SNJnJkDZr0qL77zelg4oISwiBw3POed-8CL0EfAHA-XtMGKE1oxjjSuSbDzxCK6C0Kglh9DFazUg5M2foWUrHTAJn4ik6A8wpboRYoZtLF3qjD2pwWvliMyh_l1wqgi1U8SFMrTfl5TR03hRfQxpNdCEW2zhpp0ZT7Nxe9WYYi29GhyGNuT66MDxHT6zyybw4vWv0_dPHm-2Xcnf9-Wq72ZWaMjqWvMWsspwr0E3NTVdxTSstGgskVzXrOsxVyxRhvO4EbmvS2RZs10BlWWcVWaN3y9zbGH5MJo2yd0kb79VgwpQkh2yYYPIgCKIBXANk8PU_4DFMMX9KkhVwzAQl87TzBdorb6QbsvXR_Bp18N7sjcwWt9dywwgWDaEzXi-4jiGlaKy8ja5X8U4ClnOU8n9R5rZXJylT25vur6Yluwy8OQEq5exsVIN26Q-X9_M8eI1gwZLK4n7beWD326Xn4PaHny4amXrlfVZCpDqmSshKQl2Tez2hvqY</recordid><startdate>20000301</startdate><enddate>20000301</enddate><creator>Harner, Christopher D.</creator><creator>Janaushek, Marsie A.</creator><creator>Kanamori, Akihiro</creator><creator>Yagi, Masayoshi</creator><creator>Vogrin, Tracy M.</creator><creator>Woo, Savio L-Y.</creator><general>American Orthopaedic Society for Sports Medicine</general><general>SAGE Publications</general><general>Sage Publications, Inc</general><general>Sage Publications Ltd</general><scope>IQODW</scope><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7TS</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>NAPCQ</scope><scope>U9A</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20000301</creationdate><title>Biomechanical Analysis of a Double-Bundle Posterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction</title><author>Harner, Christopher D. ; Janaushek, Marsie A. ; Kanamori, Akihiro ; Yagi, Masayoshi ; Vogrin, Tracy M. ; Woo, Savio L-Y.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c565t-7b062f77a1c947ed27c52c89f13f77c6dd07ab6a3674d80b43dfb1fd912f6dfa3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2000</creationdate><topic>Adult</topic><topic>Aged</topic><topic>Biological and medical sciences</topic><topic>Biomechanical Phenomena</topic><topic>Cruciate ligaments</topic><topic>Flexibility</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Knee</topic><topic>Knee Injuries - physiopathology</topic><topic>Knee Injuries - surgery</topic><topic>Ligaments</topic><topic>Medical procedures</topic><topic>Medical sciences</topic><topic>Methods</topic><topic>Middle Aged</topic><topic>Orthopedic Procedures</topic><topic>Orthopedic surgery</topic><topic>Posterior Cruciate Ligament - injuries</topic><topic>Posterior Cruciate Ligament - surgery</topic><topic>Reconstructive Surgical Procedures</topic><topic>Rupture</topic><topic>Sports medicine</topic><topic>Surgery</topic><topic>Surgery (general aspects). Transplantations, organ and tissue grafts. Graft diseases</topic><topic>Tibia - physiopathology</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Harner, Christopher D.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Janaushek, Marsie A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kanamori, Akihiro</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Yagi, Masayoshi</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Vogrin, Tracy M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Woo, Savio L-Y.</creatorcontrib><collection>Pascal-Francis</collection><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Physical Education Index</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Premium</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>American journal of sports medicine</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Harner, Christopher D.</au><au>Janaushek, Marsie A.</au><au>Kanamori, Akihiro</au><au>Yagi, Masayoshi</au><au>Vogrin, Tracy M.</au><au>Woo, Savio L-Y.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Biomechanical Analysis of a Double-Bundle Posterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction</atitle><jtitle>American journal of sports medicine</jtitle><addtitle>Am J Sports Med</addtitle><date>2000-03-01</date><risdate>2000</risdate><volume>28</volume><issue>2</issue><spage>144</spage><epage>151</epage><pages>144-151</pages><issn>0363-5465</issn><eissn>1552-3365</eissn><coden>AJSMDO</coden><abstract>The objective of this study was to experimentally evaluate a single-bundle versus a double-bundle posterior cruciate ligament
reconstruction by comparing the resulting knee biomechanics with those of the intact knee. Ten human cadaveric knees were
tested using a robotic/universal force-moment sensor testing system. The knees were subjected to a 134-N posterior tibial
load at five flexion angles. Three knee conditions were tested: 1) intact knee, 2) single-bundle reconstruction, and 3) double-bundle
reconstruction. Posterior tibial translation of the intact knee ranged from 4.9 ± 2.7 mm at 90° to 7.2 ± 1.5 mm at full extension.
After the single-bundle reconstruction, posterior tibial translation increased to 7.3 ± 3.9 mm and 9.2 ± 2.8 mm at 90° and
full extension, respectively, while the corresponding in situ forces in the graft were up to 44 ± 19 N lower than those in
the intact ligament. Conversely, with double-bundle reconstruction, the posterior tibial translation did not differ significantly
from the intact knee at any flexion angle tested. This reconstruction also restored in situ forces more closely than did the
single-bundle reconstruction. These data suggest that a double-bundle posterior cruciate ligament reconstruction can more
closely restore the biomechanics of the intact knee than can the single-bundle reconstruction throughout the range of knee
flexion.</abstract><cop>Los Angeles, CA</cop><pub>American Orthopaedic Society for Sports Medicine</pub><pmid>10750988</pmid><doi>10.1177/03635465000280020201</doi><tpages>8</tpages></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 0363-5465 |
| ispartof | American journal of sports medicine, 2000-03, Vol.28 (2), p.144-151 |
| issn | 0363-5465 1552-3365 |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_71017303 |
| source | MEDLINE; SAGE Complete A-Z List; Alma/SFX Local Collection |
| subjects | Adult Aged Biological and medical sciences Biomechanical Phenomena Cruciate ligaments Flexibility Humans Knee Knee Injuries - physiopathology Knee Injuries - surgery Ligaments Medical procedures Medical sciences Methods Middle Aged Orthopedic Procedures Orthopedic surgery Posterior Cruciate Ligament - injuries Posterior Cruciate Ligament - surgery Reconstructive Surgical Procedures Rupture Sports medicine Surgery Surgery (general aspects). Transplantations, organ and tissue grafts. Graft diseases Tibia - physiopathology |
| title | Biomechanical Analysis of a Double-Bundle Posterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-06T09%3A44%3A22IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-gale_proqu&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Biomechanical%20Analysis%20of%20a%20Double-Bundle%20Posterior%20Cruciate%20Ligament%20Reconstruction&rft.jtitle=American%20journal%20of%20sports%20medicine&rft.au=Harner,%20Christopher%20D.&rft.date=2000-03-01&rft.volume=28&rft.issue=2&rft.spage=144&rft.epage=151&rft.pages=144-151&rft.issn=0363-5465&rft.eissn=1552-3365&rft.coden=AJSMDO&rft_id=info:doi/10.1177/03635465000280020201&rft_dat=%3Cgale_proqu%3EA63089353%3C/gale_proqu%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=217068533&rft_id=info:pmid/10750988&rft_galeid=A63089353&rft_sage_id=10.1177_03635465000280020201&rfr_iscdi=true |