Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W3109062011> ?p ?o ?g. }
- W3109062011 endingPage "73" @default.
- W3109062011 startingPage "66" @default.
- W3109062011 abstract "ObjectivesGiven the common occurrence of residual laxity and re-injury post anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR), additional anterolateral procedures are increasingly used in combination with an ACLR. Despite the perception that there is a risk of over-constraining the lateral tibiofemoral (LTF) compartment, potentially leading to osteoarthritis, assessment on their effect on intra-articular compartment pressures is still lacking. Our objective was therefore, through a pilot biomechanical study, to compare LTF contact pressures after the most commonly used anterolateral procedures.MethodsA controlled laboratory pilot study was performed using 4 fresh-frozen cadaveric whole lower limbs. Through 0° to 90° of flexion, LTF contact pressures were measured with a Tekscan sensor, located under the lateral meniscus. Knee kinematics were obtained in 3 conditions of rotation (NR: neutral, ER: external and IR: internal rotation) to record the position of the knees for each loading condition. A Motion Analysis system with a coordinate system based on CT scans 3D bone modelling was used. After an ACLR, defined as the reference baseline, 5 anterolateral procedures were compared: anterolateral ligament reconstruction (ALLR), modified Ellison, deep Lemaire, superficial Lemaire and modified MacIntosh procedures. The last 3 procedures were randomised. For each procedure, the graft was fixed in NR at 30° of flexion and with a tension of 20 N.ResultsCompared with isolated ACLR, addition of either ALLR or modified Ellison procedure did not increased the overall LTF contact pressure (all p>0.05) through the full range of flexion for the IR condition. Conversely, deep Lemaire, superficial Lemaire and modified MacIntosh procedure (all p<0.05) did increase the overall LTF contact pressure compared with ACLR in IR. No significant difference was observed in ER and NR conditions.ConclusionThis pilot study, comparing the main anterolateral procedures, revealed that addition of either ALLR or modified Ellison procedure did not change the overall contact pressure in the LTF compartment through 0° to 90° of knee flexion. In contrast, the deep and superficial Lemaire, and modified MacIntosh procedures significantly increased overall LTF contact pressures when the knee was internally rotated. Given the common occurrence of residual laxity and re-injury post anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR), additional anterolateral procedures are increasingly used in combination with an ACLR. Despite the perception that there is a risk of over-constraining the lateral tibiofemoral (LTF) compartment, potentially leading to osteoarthritis, assessment on their effect on intra-articular compartment pressures is still lacking. Our objective was therefore, through a pilot biomechanical study, to compare LTF contact pressures after the most commonly used anterolateral procedures. A controlled laboratory pilot study was performed using 4 fresh-frozen cadaveric whole lower limbs. Through 0° to 90° of flexion, LTF contact pressures were measured with a Tekscan sensor, located under the lateral meniscus. Knee kinematics were obtained in 3 conditions of rotation (NR: neutral, ER: external and IR: internal rotation) to record the position of the knees for each loading condition. A Motion Analysis system with a coordinate system based on CT scans 3D bone modelling was used. After an ACLR, defined as the reference baseline, 5 anterolateral procedures were compared: anterolateral ligament reconstruction (ALLR), modified Ellison, deep Lemaire, superficial Lemaire and modified MacIntosh procedures. The last 3 procedures were randomised. For each procedure, the graft was fixed in NR at 30° of flexion and with a tension of 20 N. Compared with isolated ACLR, addition of either ALLR or modified Ellison procedure did not increased the overall LTF contact pressure (all p>0.05) through the full range of flexion for the IR condition. Conversely, deep Lemaire, superficial Lemaire and modified MacIntosh procedure (all p<0.05) did increase the overall LTF contact pressure compared with ACLR in IR. No significant difference was observed in ER and NR conditions. This pilot study, comparing the main anterolateral procedures, revealed that addition of either ALLR or modified Ellison procedure did not change the overall contact pressure in the LTF compartment through 0° to 90° of knee flexion. In contrast, the deep and superficial Lemaire, and modified MacIntosh procedures significantly increased overall LTF contact pressures when the knee was internally rotated." @default.
- W3109062011 created "2020-12-07" @default.
- W3109062011 creator A5007829352 @default.
- W3109062011 creator A5013503916 @default.
- W3109062011 creator A5016156427 @default.
- W3109062011 creator A5022470901 @default.
- W3109062011 creator A5030425036 @default.
- W3109062011 creator A5044477444 @default.
- W3109062011 creator A5045615142 @default.
- W3109062011 creator A5048932956 @default.
- W3109062011 creator A5053376455 @default.
- W3109062011 creator A5060312527 @default.
- W3109062011 creator A5062896136 @default.
- W3109062011 creator A5071599692 @default.
- W3109062011 date "2021-03-01" @default.
- W3109062011 modified "2023-10-17" @default.
- W3109062011 title "Lateral tenodesis procedures increase lateral compartment pressures more than anterolateral ligament reconstruction, when performed in combination with ACL reconstruction: a pilot biomechanical study" @default.
- W3109062011 cites W1513407311 @default.
- W3109062011 cites W1774430852 @default.
- W3109062011 cites W190576452 @default.
- W3109062011 cites W1935540564 @default.
- W3109062011 cites W1979917219 @default.
- W3109062011 cites W1996117239 @default.
- W3109062011 cites W1996911107 @default.
- W3109062011 cites W1996933307 @default.
- W3109062011 cites W2000620132 @default.
- W3109062011 cites W2013568845 @default.
- W3109062011 cites W2032788174 @default.
- W3109062011 cites W2035099901 @default.
- W3109062011 cites W2037577821 @default.
- W3109062011 cites W2042990087 @default.
- W3109062011 cites W2053727848 @default.
- W3109062011 cites W2064836251 @default.
- W3109062011 cites W2078936766 @default.
- W3109062011 cites W2099519082 @default.
- W3109062011 cites W2106969877 @default.
- W3109062011 cites W2132698261 @default.
- W3109062011 cites W2164905871 @default.
- W3109062011 cites W2194700237 @default.
- W3109062011 cites W2214008523 @default.
- W3109062011 cites W2273561821 @default.
- W3109062011 cites W2289321255 @default.
- W3109062011 cites W2346536965 @default.
- W3109062011 cites W2346814886 @default.
- W3109062011 cites W2460040617 @default.
- W3109062011 cites W2562534755 @default.
- W3109062011 cites W2597175572 @default.
- W3109062011 cites W2739648613 @default.
- W3109062011 cites W2745017473 @default.
- W3109062011 cites W2755224836 @default.
- W3109062011 cites W2767025575 @default.
- W3109062011 cites W2778636705 @default.
- W3109062011 cites W2790550066 @default.
- W3109062011 cites W2794515679 @default.
- W3109062011 cites W2796932381 @default.
- W3109062011 cites W2883979938 @default.
- W3109062011 cites W2903573652 @default.
- W3109062011 cites W2913014564 @default.
- W3109062011 cites W2954858858 @default.
- W3109062011 cites W4300999132 @default.
- W3109062011 doi "https://doi.org/10.1136/jisakos-2019-000368" @default.
- W3109062011 hasPubMedId "https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33832979" @default.
- W3109062011 hasPublicationYear "2021" @default.
- W3109062011 type Work @default.
- W3109062011 sameAs 3109062011 @default.
- W3109062011 citedByCount "12" @default.
- W3109062011 countsByYear W31090620112021 @default.
- W3109062011 countsByYear W31090620112022 @default.
- W3109062011 countsByYear W31090620112023 @default.
- W3109062011 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
- W3109062011 hasAuthorship W3109062011A5007829352 @default.
- W3109062011 hasAuthorship W3109062011A5013503916 @default.
- W3109062011 hasAuthorship W3109062011A5016156427 @default.
- W3109062011 hasAuthorship W3109062011A5022470901 @default.
- W3109062011 hasAuthorship W3109062011A5030425036 @default.
- W3109062011 hasAuthorship W3109062011A5044477444 @default.
- W3109062011 hasAuthorship W3109062011A5045615142 @default.
- W3109062011 hasAuthorship W3109062011A5048932956 @default.
- W3109062011 hasAuthorship W3109062011A5053376455 @default.
- W3109062011 hasAuthorship W3109062011A5060312527 @default.
- W3109062011 hasAuthorship W3109062011A5062896136 @default.
- W3109062011 hasAuthorship W3109062011A5071599692 @default.
- W3109062011 hasBestOaLocation W31090620111 @default.
- W3109062011 hasConcept C141071460 @default.
- W3109062011 hasConcept C175696284 @default.
- W3109062011 hasConcept C189178095 @default.
- W3109062011 hasConcept C2524010 @default.
- W3109062011 hasConcept C2778434673 @default.
- W3109062011 hasConcept C2780695755 @default.
- W3109062011 hasConcept C2780887989 @default.
- W3109062011 hasConcept C29694066 @default.
- W3109062011 hasConcept C33923547 @default.
- W3109062011 hasConcept C60465272 @default.
- W3109062011 hasConcept C61511704 @default.
- W3109062011 hasConcept C71924100 @default.
- W3109062011 hasConcept C91762617 @default.
- W3109062011 hasConceptScore W3109062011C141071460 @default.
- W3109062011 hasConceptScore W3109062011C175696284 @default.