CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 48Knee injuries and reconstruction techniquesFoot and Ankle SurgeryTendon Structure and Treatment

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 42 of the 42 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Anatomic Double‐Bundle Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: Kinematics and Knee Flexion Angle–Graft Tension Relation

Murray, Patrick J., Alexander, Jerry W., Gold, Jonathan E., Icenogle, Kurt D., Noble, Philip C., Lowe, Walter R.·2010·Arthroscopy
DOI 10.1016/j.arthro.2009.07.014
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to compare the bundle tension curves and resultant knee kinematics between 2 tensioning protocols in anatomic double‐bundle anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction. Methods: Anatomic double‐bundle ACL reconstruction was performed in 7 male cadaveric knees. Each graft was tensioned to 22 N under 2 conditions: (1) both bundles tensioned at 20° of knee flexion (20/20 protocol) or (2) posterolateral (PL) bundle tensioned at 15° and anteromedial (AM) bundle at 45° (45/15 protocol). Knee kinematics were recorded in response to anterior and combined rotatory loads in the intact, ACL‐deficient, and reconstructed states. Bundle tension was recorded dynamically with knee motion and during each loading test. Results: Tensioning both bundles at 20° of knee flexion resulted in a reciprocal bundle tension pattern that was not statistically different; the PL bundle tension was greater than the AM bundle tension in full extension, and the AM bundle tension was greater than the PL bundle tension from 25° to 120°. In the second tensioning protocol, the AM bundle tension was significantly greater than the PL bundle tension at all flexion angles. Both tensioning protocols restored normal knee kinematics. Conclusions: Bundle‐tensioning protocol is a variable that has a significant effect on the bundle‐loading patterns in double‐bundle ACL reconstruction. The 20/20 protocol resulted in AM and PL bundle–loading patterns that were equivalent during dynamic testing, whereas the 45/15 protocol led to excessive tension in the AM bundle in full extension. We recommend equal tensioning of both bundles with the knee at 20° of flexion to restore relatively normal tension curves in each bundle and to avoid excessive stress on the AM bundle. Clinical Relevance: In double‐bundle ACL reconstruction, there is no consensus regarding bundle‐tensioning protocols. This study provides data on the individual bundle tension curves that result from 2 commonly used tensioning protocols. These data will assist clinicians as the technique and application of double‐bundle ACL reconstruction move forward.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.arthro.2009.07.014

Cites

42 of 42 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. Chhabra A., 2006, Anatomic, radiographic, biomechanical and kinematic evaluation of the ACL and its 2 functional bundles, J Bone Joint Surg Am, 88, 2

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Metadata

Authors
Murray, P. J., Alexander, J. W., Gold, J. E., Icenogle, K. D., Noble, P. C., & Lowe, W. R.
Affiliations
  • Clarkstown Orthopedics West Nyack New York U.S.A.
  • Institute of Orthopedic Research and Education (US)
  • Baylor College of Medicine (US)
Corresponding author
Murray, Patrick J.
ORCID
Lowe, Walter R.
Venue
Arthroscopy
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2010-01-11
Volume
26
Issue
2
Pages
202-213
ISSN
  • 0749-8063 (ISSN-L)
  • 1526-3231
DOI
10.1016/j.arthro.2009.07.014
OpenAlex
W2120964298
Cited by
48
References
42
Citations by year
2023: 3 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 1 · 2015: 6 · 2014: 1 · 2013: 6 · 2012: 8
FWCI
8.43
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
Locations
  • Arthroscopy The Journal of Arthroscopic and Related Surgery (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Knee injuries and reconstruction techniques
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Orthopedics and Sports Medicine › Foot and Ankle Surgery
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Orthopedics and Sports Medicine › Tendon Structure and Treatment
Keywords
double-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction, knee kinematics, knee flexion angle, anteromedial bundle, posterolateral bundle, anterior cruciate ligament deficiency, cadaveric knee
MeSH terms
Adult, Ankle Joint, Biomechanical Phenomena, Bone Screws, Bone Wires, Cadaver, Femur, Humans, Knee Joint, Middle Aged, Stress, Mechanical, Sutures, Tibia, Range of Motion, Articular, Anterior Cruciate Ligament, Weight-Bearing, Plastic Surgery Procedures

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review