Cargando…

Biomechanical Evidence on Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction

Objective  Anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction is recommended in athletes with high physical demands. Several techniques are used in reconstruction; however, the most relevant question still is the best biomechanical positioning for the graft. The present study aimed to analyze the biome...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Completo, António, Noronha, José Carlos, Oliveira, Carlos, Fonseca, Fernando
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Sociedade Brasileira de Ortopedia e Traumatologia. Published by Thieme Revnter Publicações Ltda 2019
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6529322/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31363266
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.rbo.2017.11.008
_version_ 1783420355310780416
author Completo, António
Noronha, José Carlos
Oliveira, Carlos
Fonseca, Fernando
author_facet Completo, António
Noronha, José Carlos
Oliveira, Carlos
Fonseca, Fernando
author_sort Completo, António
collection PubMed
description Objective  Anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction is recommended in athletes with high physical demands. Several techniques are used in reconstruction; however, the most relevant question still is the best biomechanical positioning for the graft. The present study aimed to analyze the biomechanical effect of the position of bone tunnels on load distribution and joint kinetics, as well as the medium-term functional outcomes after ACL reconstruction. Methods  A biomechanical study using a finite element model of the original knee (without anterior cruciate ligament rupture) and reconstruction of the ACL (neoACL) was performed in four combinations of bone tunnel positions (central femoral-central tibial, anterior femoral-central tibial, posterosuperior femoral-anterior tibial, and central femoral-anterior tibial) using the same type of graft. Each neo-ACL model was compared with the original knee model regarding cartilaginous contact pressure, femoral and meniscal rotation and translation, and ligamentous deformation. Results  No neo-ACL model was able to fully replicate the original knee model. When the femoral tunnel was posteriorly positioned, cartilage pressures were 25% lower, and the mobility of the meniscus was 12 to 30% higher compared with the original knee model. When the femoral tunnel was in the anterior position, internal rotation was 50% lower than in the original knee model. Conclusion  Results show that the femoral tunnel farther from the central position appears to be more suitable for a distinct behavior regarding the intact joint. The most anterior position increases rotational instability.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6529322
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher Sociedade Brasileira de Ortopedia e Traumatologia. Published by Thieme Revnter Publicações Ltda
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-65293222019-07-29 Biomechanical Evidence on Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction Completo, António Noronha, José Carlos Oliveira, Carlos Fonseca, Fernando Rev Bras Ortop (Sao Paulo) Objective  Anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction is recommended in athletes with high physical demands. Several techniques are used in reconstruction; however, the most relevant question still is the best biomechanical positioning for the graft. The present study aimed to analyze the biomechanical effect of the position of bone tunnels on load distribution and joint kinetics, as well as the medium-term functional outcomes after ACL reconstruction. Methods  A biomechanical study using a finite element model of the original knee (without anterior cruciate ligament rupture) and reconstruction of the ACL (neoACL) was performed in four combinations of bone tunnel positions (central femoral-central tibial, anterior femoral-central tibial, posterosuperior femoral-anterior tibial, and central femoral-anterior tibial) using the same type of graft. Each neo-ACL model was compared with the original knee model regarding cartilaginous contact pressure, femoral and meniscal rotation and translation, and ligamentous deformation. Results  No neo-ACL model was able to fully replicate the original knee model. When the femoral tunnel was posteriorly positioned, cartilage pressures were 25% lower, and the mobility of the meniscus was 12 to 30% higher compared with the original knee model. When the femoral tunnel was in the anterior position, internal rotation was 50% lower than in the original knee model. Conclusion  Results show that the femoral tunnel farther from the central position appears to be more suitable for a distinct behavior regarding the intact joint. The most anterior position increases rotational instability. Sociedade Brasileira de Ortopedia e Traumatologia. Published by Thieme Revnter Publicações Ltda 2019-04 2019-04-17 /pmc/articles/PMC6529322/ /pubmed/31363266 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.rbo.2017.11.008 Text en https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives License, which permits unrestricted reproduction and distribution, for non-commercial purposes only; and use and reproduction, but not distribution, of adapted material for non-commercial purposes only, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Completo, António
Noronha, José Carlos
Oliveira, Carlos
Fonseca, Fernando
Biomechanical Evidence on Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction
title Biomechanical Evidence on Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction
title_full Biomechanical Evidence on Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction
title_fullStr Biomechanical Evidence on Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction
title_full_unstemmed Biomechanical Evidence on Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction
title_short Biomechanical Evidence on Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction
title_sort biomechanical evidence on anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6529322/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31363266
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.rbo.2017.11.008
work_keys_str_mv AT completoantonio biomechanicalevidenceonanteriorcruciateligamentreconstruction
AT noronhajosecarlos biomechanicalevidenceonanteriorcruciateligamentreconstruction
AT oliveiracarlos biomechanicalevidenceonanteriorcruciateligamentreconstruction
AT fonsecafernando biomechanicalevidenceonanteriorcruciateligamentreconstruction