A New Mechanical Testing Device for Measuring Anteroposterior Knee Laxity

Schuster, A. J.; McNicholas, Michael; Wachtl, S. W.; McGurty, D. W.; Jakob, R. P.

doi:10.1177/0363546504267050

Cited by 79 publications

(77 citation statements)

References 7 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The present protocol could be useful to the surgeon to decide about additional surgical actions to be taken, [7] 7±2 Langrana [15] 6.8±0.5 Markolf [18] 9±2 7±2 30±8 5±2 12±4 Shoemaker [26] 41±11 47±9 Forster [9] 4.4±1.8 Katabi [14] 4.7±3.6 Boyer [4] 2.4±2.2 Pedowitz [21] 11±2.2 Pollet [22] 4±2.3 Balasch [3] 6.3 Ganko [10] 6.9±1. [15] 11.1±1 Markolf [18] 15±3 9±4 33±8 6±4 14±4 Forster [9] 8.3±3.5 Katabi [14] 8±3 Boyer [4] 6.3±3.1 Pedowitz [21] 21±4 Pollet [22] 6.3±5.4 Balasch [3] 12.7 Ganko [10] 11.4±2.9 Schuster [27] 10(8.9-11.2) 6.4(5.6-7.3) Loh [16] 12 such as lateral plasty in case of a too high laxity is detected after the reconstruction, or a different graft tension. The protocol we have presented, once further validated with a larger set of cases and surgeons, could be easily included in present computer-assisted procedures for ACL reconstruction and, therefore, improve the documentation of ACL procedure at time zero at the intraoperative planning design.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

New intraoperative protocol for kinematic evaluation of ACL reconstruction: preliminary results

Zaffagnini

Bignozzi

Martelli

et al. 2006

Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthr

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A real improvement in anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) surgery would be achieved if a global kinematic evaluation of graft performance could be made during surgery. A quantitative evaluation of all residual instabilities would be helpful in the evaluation of graft performances. This paper describes a new protocol for an accurate and extensive computer-assisted in vivo evaluation of joint laxities during ACL reconstruction. Fifteen in vivo kinematic evaluations during ACL reconstruction were performed using an optical localizer and custom software. The capability of the protocol was studied by analyzing the accuracy and repeatability of the results, the ergonomics of the setup, time taken, interactions with the surgical steps, and efficacy of the acquisitions. Repeatability of the tests, at maximum force, remained under 1 mm/2 degrees . Repeatability in tibia position and orientation was lower than 1 mm/4 degrees . Secondary laxities during stress tests remained under 2 mm/3 degrees . Added time to surgery was about 11 min. ACL graft increased joint stability up to 52% with respect to the preoperative level. The simplicity and morbidity of the test procedure and system was minimally invasive and allowed a quantitative evaluation of knee laxities at time zero. The repeatability of the tests opens the way for future research on in vivo evaluation of different ACL reconstruction techniques, which may lead to a better understanding of associated lesions and their role to the global knee stability.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

New intraoperative protocol for kinematic evaluation of ACL reconstruction: preliminary results

Zaffagnini

Bignozzi

Martelli

et al. 2006

Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthr

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Several groups have published their results, ranging from 0.24, 0.55-0.72, to 0.49-1.0 [57][58][59]. Again, investigators cited inherent subjectivity in explaining this variability.…”

Section: Rolimetermentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Studies have found comparable results with the KT-1000, Rolimeter, and Stryker devices, and consistently inferior validity and reliability with the Genucom system [36,55,59,60,64,84,85]. It is important to note that each device's results will fundamentally differ, and clinicians must therefore not assume comparability between measurements from different devices [59,60,85].…”

Section: Comparative Studiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Anterior cruciate ligament assessment using arthrometry and stress imaging

Rohman

Macalena

2016

Curr Rev Musculoskelet Med

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Arthrometry and stress imaging are useful clinical tools for the objective assessment of anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) integrity. They are most frequently used for the diagnosis of a complete ACL tear when other workup is equivocal, in conjunction with history and clinical exam findings. Other applications include the diagnosis of partial ACL tears, injury prognosis, and post-operative monitoring. However, further studies are needed to validate these uses. Many different devices and techniques exist for objective examination, which have been compared in recent literature. Reliability and validity measures of these methods vary, and often depend upon examiner familiarity and skill. The KT series of devices is the current gold standard for arthrometry, although the newer robotic GNRB device shows promising early results. Newer methods of data interpretation have been developed for stress imaging, and portable technology may impact this field further.

show abstract

“…Biomechanical evaluation of the knee stability: For the evaluation of knee stability the Rollimeter Aircast™ knee tester was used. Schuster et al [9] have demonstrated that the Rollimeter is as reproducible and reliable as the KT-1000 arthrometer and it offers a valid method for the measurement of anteroposterior translation of the knee. The tests performed were the anterior drawer test and the Lachmann test.…”

Section: Clinical and Objective Evaluations: This Was Done By Anmentioning

confidence: 99%

Anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction with LARS™ artificial ligament results at a mean follow-up of eight years

Parchi

Ciapini

Dolfi

et al. 2013

International Orthopaedics (SICOT)

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose The aim of this study was to review patients that underwent ACL reconstruction with the LARS™ ligament in the First Orthopaedic Division of Pisa University during the period between January 2003 and December 2005. Methods Twenty-six patients were reviewed with an average follow-up of 95.3 months (7.9 years). The review protocol was articulated in three phases: (1) a subjective evaluation using three grading scales: VAS, KOOS and the Cincinnati knee rating scale, (2) a clinical and objective evaluation, and (3) a biomechanical evaluation of the knee stability. Results A global positive result was obtained in 92.3 % of the patients (16 optimal results and eight good results), with a fast functional recovery and a high knee stability. A global poor result was reported in two cases. In our series we did not record cases of infection or knee synovitis. We recorded only one case of mechanical graft failure. The results obtained from our study are encouraging and similar to those in the literature. Conclusions We conclude that the LARS™ ligament can be considered a suitable option for ACL reconstruction in carefully selected cases, especially for older patients needing a fast functional recovery.

show abstract

A New Mechanical Testing Device for Measuring Anteroposterior Knee Laxity

Cited by 79 publications

References 7 publications

New intraoperative protocol for kinematic evaluation of ACL reconstruction: preliminary results

New intraoperative protocol for kinematic evaluation of ACL reconstruction: preliminary results

Anterior cruciate ligament assessment using arthrometry and stress imaging

Anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction with LARS™ artificial ligament results at a mean follow-up of eight years

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About