Background: The biomechanical effect of lateral extra-articular tenodesis (LET) performed in conjunction with anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction (ACLR) on load sharing between the ACL graft and the LET and on knee kinematics is not clear. Purpose/Hypothesis: The purpose was to quantify the effect of LET on (1) forces carried by both the ACL graft and the LET and (2) tibiofemoral kinematics in response to simulated pivot shift and anterior laxity tests. We hypothesized that LET would decrease forces carried by the ACL graft and anterior tibial translation (ATT) in response to simulated pivoting maneuvers and during simulated tests of anterior laxity. Study Design: Controlled laboratory study. Methods: Seven cadaveric knees (mean age, 39 ± 12 years [range, 28-54 years]; 4 male) were mounted to a robotic manipulator. The robot simulated clinical pivoting maneuvers and tests of anterior laxity: namely, the Lachman and anterior drawer tests. Each knee was assessed in the following states: ACL intact, ACL sectioned, ACL reconstructed (using a bone–patellar tendon–bone autograft), and after performing LET (the modified Lemaire technique after sectioning of the anterolateral ligament and Kaplan fibers). Resultant forces carried by the ACL graft and LET at the peak applied loads were determined via superposition. ATT was determined in response to the applied loads. Results: With the applied pivoting loads, performing LET decreased ACL graft force up to 80% (44 ± 12 N; P < .001) and decreased ATT of the lateral compartment compared with that of the intact knee up to 7.6 ± 2.9 mm ( P < .001). The LET carried up to 91% of the force generated in the ACL graft during isolated ACLR (without LET). For simulated tests of anterior laxity, performing LET decreased ACL graft force by 70% (40 ± 20 N; P = .001) for the anterior drawer test with no significant difference detected for the Lachman test. No differences in ATT were deteced between ACLR with LET and the intact knee on both the Lachman and the anterior drawer tests ( P = .409). LET reduced ATT compared with isolated ACLR on the simulated anterior drawer test by 2.4 ± 1.8 mm ( P = .032) but not on the simulated Lachman test. Conclusion: In a cadaveric model, LET in combination with ACLR transferred loads from the ACL graft to the LET and reduced ATT with applied pivoting loads and during the simulated anterior drawer test. The effect of LET on ACL graft force and ATT was less pronounced on the simulated Lachman test. Clinical Relevance: LET in addition to ACLR may be a suitable option to offload the ACL graft and to reduce ATT in the lateral compartment to magnitudes less than that of the intact knee with clinical pivoting maneuvers. In contrast, LET did not offload the ACL graft or add to the anterior restraint provided by the ACL graft during the Lachman test.
Background: There is concern that utilization of lateral extra-articular tenodesis (LET) in conjunction with anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction (ACLR) may disturb lateral compartment contact mechanics and contribute to joint degeneration. Hypothesis: ACLR augmented with LET will alter lateral compartment contact mechanics in response to simulated pivoting maneuvers. Study Design: Controlled laboratory study. Methods: Loads simulating a pivot shift were applied to 7 cadaveric knees (4 male; mean age, 39 ± 12 years; range, 28-54 years) using a robotic manipulator. Each knee was tested with the ACL intact, sectioned, reconstructed (via patellar tendon autograft), and, finally, after augmenting ACLR with LET (using a modified Lemaire technique) in the presence of a sectioned anterolateral ligament and Kaplan fibers. Lateral compartment contact mechanics were measured using a contact stress transducer. Outcome measures were anteroposterior location of the center of contact stress (CCS), contact force from anterior to posterior, and peak and mean contact stress. Results: On average, augmenting ACLR with LET shifted the lateral compartment CCS anteriorly compared with the intact knee and compared with ACLR in isolation by a maximum of 5.4 ± 2.3 mm ( P < .001) and 6.0 ± 2.6 mm ( P < .001), respectively. ACLR augmented with LET also increased contact force anteriorly on the lateral tibial plateau compared with the intact knee and compared with isolated ACLR by a maximum of 12 ± 6 N ( P = .001) and 17 ± 10 N ( P = .002), respectively. Compared with ACLR in isolation, ACLR augmented with LET increased peak and mean lateral compartment contact stress by 0.7 ± 0.5 MPa ( P = .005) and by 0.17 ± 0.12 ( P = .006), respectively, at 15° of flexion. Conclusion: Under simulated pivoting loads, adding LET to ACLR anteriorized the CCS on the lateral tibial plateau, thereby increasing contact force anteriorly. Compared with ACLR in isolation, ACLR augmented with LET increased peak and mean lateral compartment contact stress at 15° of flexion. Clinical Relevance: The clinical and biological effect of increased anterior loading of the lateral compartment after LET merits further investigation. The ability of LET to anteriorize contact stress on the lateral compartment may be useful in knees with passive anterior subluxation of the lateral tibia.
Objectives: Utilization of lateral extra-articular tenodesis (LET) in conjunction with anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) has increased in recent years, however, the biomechanical impact of LET, when performed with contemporary techniques, on both load sharing between the ACL graft and the LET and on knee kinematics is not completely clear. The purpose of this study was to quantify the effect of LET performed with ACLR, in the presence of a compromised anterolateral tissues, on (1) forces carried by the ACL graft and the LET and (2) knee kinematics, during simulated pivot shift. Methods: manipulator equipped with a six-axis force-torque sensor. The robot applied multiplanar torques simulating two types of pivot shift (PS) subluxing the lateral compartment at 15° and 30° of knee flexion. The following loading combinations were applied: (PS1) 8 Nm of valgus and 4 Nm of internal rotation torques; (PS2) 100 N compression force, 8 Nm valgus torque, 2 Nm internal rotation torque, and 30 N anterior force. Anteroposterior (AP) translation in the lateral compartment of the knee was recorded in the following states: ACL intact, sectioned, reconstructed and, finally, after sectioning the anterolateral ligament (ALL) and kaplan fibers and performing a LET. ACLR was performed utilizing a bone-patellar tendon-bone autograft, via medial parapatellar arthrotomy. LET was performed using a modified lemaire technique with a metal staple femoral fixation at 60° of flexion in neutral rotation. Resultant forces carried by the ACL graft and LET at the peak applied load in all tested conditions were determined utilizing the principle of superposition and serial sectioning. Results: Under both simulated pivot shift types and at both flexion angles the ACL force decreased with the addition of a LET, with the least force reduction of 39% for PS2 at 15° (p=0.01) and the most force reduction of 80% for PS1 at 30° (p<0.001). While decreasing ACL force, the LET carried at least 43% of the force carried by the ACL graft when tested without LET for PS2 at 15° and 91% of the force carried by the ACL graft at most, for PS1 at 30° (Table 1). For both combinations of multiplananr torques and at both flexion angles, the anterior tibial translation in the lateral compartment decreased for the ACLR+LET knee compared to the intact knee (5.3mm and 7.6mm decrease, for PS1 15° and 30° respectively, p<0.001; 4.4mm p=0.005 and 7.6mm p<0.001, for PS2 15° and 30°, respectively). (Figure 2). Conclusion: During a simulated pivot shift, LET shields the ACL graft from loading. This effect was greatest at 30° of flexion with an 80% drop in ACL graft force. While some shielding of load from the ACL graft can be beneficial, a more significant reduction in the load of the ACL graft may potentially be detrimental to the graft remodeling, maturation and function. The optimal load sharing pattern for improved clinical outcomes is not well understood and merit further investigation. In addition, LET also decreases anterior tibial translation in the lateral compartment to less than that of the intact knee, which represents overconstraint of the lateral compartment. These findings may support the purported “protective” effect of LET on the ACL graft and its important role in stabilizing the lateral compartment in the setting of combined ACL and anterolateral structures deficiency. The influence of overconstraint of the lateral compartment with LET warrants further biomechanical and clinical evaluation. [Table: see text][Figure: see text][Figure: see text]
Objectives: Residual laxity after ACL reconstruction (ACLR) may adversely impact patient outcomes and function and has led to the increasing utilization of lateral extra-articular augmentation procedures in conjunction with ACLR and specifically, Lateral Extra-articular Tenodesis (LET). However, concerns of overconstraining the lateral compartment and subsequent increased lateral compartment contact stress and accelerated degenerative changes have been suggested with LET procedures. Therefore, the purpose of this work was to assess the impact of a LET on contact mechanics of the lateral compartment in response to multiplanar torques representing pivoting maneuvers. Methods: Nine cadaveric knees (4 male, 37.4 ± 11.6 years old) were mounted to a robotic manipulator equipped with a six-axis force-torque sensor. The robot applied multiplanar torques simulating two types of pivot shift (PS) maneuvers, subluxing the lateral compartment, at 30° of knee flexion. The following loading combinations were applied: (PS1) 8 Nm of valgus and 4 Nm of internal rotation torques; (PS2) 100 N compression force, 8 Nm valgus torque, 2 Nm internal rotation torque, and 30 N anterior force. Kinematics were recorded in the following states: ACL intact, sectioned, reconstructed and, finally, after sectioning the anterolateral ligament (ALL) and kaplan fibers and performing a LET. ACLR was performed utilizing a bone-patellar tendon-bone autograft, via medial parapatellar arthrotomy. LET was performed using a modified lemaire technique with a metal staple femoral fixation at 60° of flexion in neutral rotation. A contact stress transducer was then sutured to the tibial plateau beneath the menisci and the previously-determined kinematics were replayed, while recording the lateral compartment contact stress. At the peak applied loads, the following measures were determined in the lateral compartment: contact force, contact area, the anterior-posterior (AP) location of the center of contact stress (CCS), the mean contact stress, and the peak contact stress and its AP location. Statistical differences were assessed via one-way repeated measures ANOVA with Student-Neumen-Keuls post hoc test (p< 0.05). Results: Under combined valgus and internal rotation torques (PS1), the addition of a LET to ACLR increased lateral compartment contact force compared to the native knee by 51 ± 51 N (p = 0.035) on average. Contact area also increased by 60 ± 56 mm2 and 61 ± 58 mm2 relative to the ACL intact and ACL reconstructed knee (p ≤ 0.002), respectively. LET also shifted anteriorly the CCS by 4.6 ± 3.6 mm and 5.7 ± 3.1 mm on average relative to the ACL intact and ACL reconstructed knees (p < 0.001) (Fig. 1). No differences were detected for the mean and peak lateral compartment contact stress with the addition of LET compared to the ACL intact or ACL reconstructed knee (p> 0.854). The location of peak contact stress, however, shifted anteriorly compared to the ACL intact and ACL reconstructed knees by 6.2 ± 5.7 mm and 7.6 ± 5.4 mm (p < 0.001). (Fig.1). Similar results were observed under multiplanar torques with compression (PS2) for all outcome measures. Conclusion: In response to multiplanar torques representing pivoting maneuvers, the addition of a LET to ACLR, in the presence of compromised anterolateral tissues, did not increase lateral compartment contact stress. As contact force increased with the addition of LET, so did the contact area, likely mitigating changes in the level of contact stress. LET shifted the contact location anteriorly thereby altering regional loading of the lateral articular cartilage. Further study of the impact of changes in regional loading patterns in the lateral compartment on cartilage degeneration is warranted. [Figure: see text]
Objectives: Lateral extra-articular tenodesis (LET) reduces ACL graft failure rates two years after surgery when performed as an adjunct to ACL reconstruction (ACLR). Interestingly, previous biomechanical studies have shown that LET may reduce tibial rotation beyond that of the intact knee, while others found no such kinematic overconstraint. Parameters of ligament engagement have proven useful in characterizing the biomechanical function of the ACL and the anterolateral ligament; however, they have not been used to describe the biomechanics of LET. In this study, we compared engagement parameters (engagement point, in situ stiffness, and tissue force at peak applied load) of an LET-reconstructed knee compared to the native lateral tissues in response to an internal rotation torque at 0°, 30°, 60°, and 90° of knee flexion. Methods: Seven cadaveric knees (mean age: 39 ± 12; range: 28-54; 4 male) were mounted to a robotic manipulator. The robot applied an internal rotation torque of 5 Nm while monitoring the resulting internal tibial rotation (ITR) (in degrees). Each knee was tested following a bone-patellar tendon-bone ACL reconstruction with intact lateral tissues (consisting of the anterolateral ligament and Kaplan fibers) and after sectioning these tissues and performing LET (modified Lemaire technique). Resultant forces carried by the native lateral tissues and the LET were determined via superposition. The parameters of engagement were determined for both the native lateral tissues and the LET and compared via two-way repeated measures ANOVA (p < 0.05). Results: During an internal rotation test at full extension (0° of flexion), both the LET-reconstructed and native lateral tissues did not engage. At 30°, 60°, and 90° knee flexion, the native lateral tissues exhibited more in situ slack than the LET-reconstructed lateral tissues. Specifically, the native lateral tissues had 8° (p < 0.001), 13° (p < 0.001), and 14° (p < 0.001) more in situ slack than the LET-reconstructed lateral tissues at 30°, 60°, and 90° knee flexion, respectively. At 30° of flexion, the LET-reconstructed lateral tissues were 9° (p < 0.001) and 10° (p < 0.001) more slack than at 60° and 90° knee flexion. Across all three tested knee flexion angles (30°, 60°, and 90°), the LET-reconstructed lateral tissues had greater in situ stiffness than the native lateral tissues. The LET carried greater force at the peak applied internal rotation torque by 29 N at 30° of flexion (p = 0.006), but no statistical differences were identified at the other flexion angles. Conclusions: LET creates a supraphysiologic restraint to the native lateral tissues by engaging with less internal tibial rotation than the native lateral tissue at all flexion angles tested but full extension. The LET also carried greater force at the peak applied load and had a greater in situ stiffness at 30° of flexion than the native lateral tissues. On the whole, LET is a supraphysiological restraint to internal tibial rotation at 30° of flexion. The engagement point of LET may be modified surgically by altering the flexion angle, degree of tibial rotation at which the tenodesis is fixed, and/or the tension applied. Thus, discrepancies between previous biomechanical studies may arise from variations in one or more of these modifiable surgical parameters. [Figure: see text]
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2025 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.