2010
DOI: 10.1007/s00167-010-1338-3
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Biomechanical comparison of three anatomic ACL reconstructions in a porcine model

Abstract: The in situ force in the ACL is better restored with an anatomic three-tunnel DB reconstruction in response to the simulated pivot-shift test at low flexion angle when compared to an anatomic SB reconstruction. Both three-tunnel DB ACL reconstructions performed in an anatomic fashion had similar biomechanical behavior. As long as it is performed anatomically, DB ACL reconstruction could be better alternative than SB ACL reconstruction, no matter which three-tunnel procedure, 2F-1T or 1F-2T, is used.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
28
0

Year Published

2011
2011
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
7
3

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 36 publications
(29 citation statements)
references
References 64 publications
1
28
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Altered magnitudes in external loading could have confounded or biased the ensemble averages through increased variability. However, biomechanical tendencies in investigations with different loading magnitudes were often similar as ACLD increased ATT relative to ACL-intact knees throughout flexion under each Lachman’s and pivot-shift loads;[32, 62, 64, 66, 69, 96101] ACLR restored ATT relative to ACLD under Lachman’s loads, but not necessarily to the level of ACL-intact knees;[62, 96, 99, 101] ACLR restored ITR relative to ACL-intact knees under rotational loads;[31, 41, 62] and ACLR graft forces were not consistent with ACL-intact ligament forces. [6365, 99, 101] Therefore, normalized mechanical response of ACL, ACLD, and ACLR specimens generally remains constant across varied magnitudes of external loading, though absolute values may differ.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Altered magnitudes in external loading could have confounded or biased the ensemble averages through increased variability. However, biomechanical tendencies in investigations with different loading magnitudes were often similar as ACLD increased ATT relative to ACL-intact knees throughout flexion under each Lachman’s and pivot-shift loads;[32, 62, 64, 66, 69, 96101] ACLR restored ATT relative to ACLD under Lachman’s loads, but not necessarily to the level of ACL-intact knees;[62, 96, 99, 101] ACLR restored ITR relative to ACL-intact knees under rotational loads;[31, 41, 62] and ACLR graft forces were not consistent with ACL-intact ligament forces. [6365, 99, 101] Therefore, normalized mechanical response of ACL, ACLD, and ACLR specimens generally remains constant across varied magnitudes of external loading, though absolute values may differ.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, the porcine bone model is well established in this context and was proven for its similar characteristics compared with young human knee bone [8,11,16].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…From the in vitro setting, the use of customdesigned robotic mechanisms ( Fig. 1) and industrial robotic manipulators has enabled researchers to standardize the magnitude and direction of forces and moments applied to the knee [19][20][21][22][23]. This has allowed the practice of repeatable forces applied to the joint under study.…”
Section: Basic Theory Of Clinical Knee Biomechanics and Objective Assmentioning
confidence: 99%