Lording Timothy, Corbo Gillian, Bryant Dianne, Burkhart Timothy A, Getgood Alan
Melbourne Orthopaedic Group, Windsor, VIC, Australia.
Anatomy and Cell Biology, Schulich School of Medicine and Dentistry, Western University, London, ON, Canada.
Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2017 Oct;475(10):2401-2408. doi: 10.1007/s11999-017-5364-z.
Injury to the anterolateral ligament (ALL) has been reported to contribute to high-grade anterolateral laxity after anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injury. Failure to address ALL injury has been suggested as a cause of persistent rotational laxity after ACL reconstruction. Lateral meniscus posterior root (LMPR) tears have also been shown to cause increased internal rotation of the knee.
QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: The purpose of this study was to determine the functional relationship between the ALL and LMPR in the control of internal rotation of the ACL-deficient knee. Specifically: (1) We asked if there was a difference in internal rotation among: the intact knee; the ACL-deficient knee; the ACL/ALL-deficient knee; the ACL/LMPR-deficient knee; and the ACL/ALL/LMPR-deficient knee. (2) We also asked if there was a difference in anterior translation among these conditions.
Sixteen fresh frozen cadaveric knee specimens (eight men, mean age 79 years) were potted into a hip simulator (femur) and a 6 degree-of-freedom load cell (tibia). Rigid optical trackers were inserted into the proximal femur and distal tibia, allowing for the motion of the tibia with respect to the femur to be tracked during biomechanical tests. A series of points on the femur and tibia were digitized to create bone coordinate systems that were used to calculate internal rotation and anterior translation. Biomechanical testing involved applying a 5-Nm internal rotation moment to the tibia from full extension to 90° of flexion. Anterior translation was performed by applying a 90-N anterior load using a tensiometer. Both tests were performed in 15° increments tested sequentially in the following conditions: (1) intact; and (2) ACL injury (ACL-). The specimens were then randomized to either have the ALL sectioned (3) first (M+/ALL-); or (4) the LMPR sectioned first (M-/ALL+) followed by the other structure (M-/ALL-). A one-way analysis of variance was performed for each sectioning condition at each angle of knee flexion (α = 0.05).
At 0° of flexion there was an effect of tissue sectioning such that internal rotation of the M-/ALL- condition was greater than ACL- by 1.24° (p = 0.03; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.16-2.70) and the intact condition by 2.5° (p = 0.01; 95% CI, 0.69-3.91). In addition, the mean (SD) internal rotations for the M+/ALL- (9.99° [5.39°]) and M-/ALL+ (12.05° [5.34°]) were greater by 0.87° (p = 0.04; 95% CI, 0.13-3.83) and by 2.15°, respectively, compared with the intact knee. At 45° the internal rotation for the ACL- (19.15° [9.49°]), M+/ALL- (23.70° [7.00°]), and M-/ALL- (18.80° [8.27°]) conditions was different than the intact (12.78° [9.23°]) condition by 6.37° (p = 0.02; 95% CI, 1.37-11.41), 8.47° (p < 0.01; 95% CI, 3.94-13.00), and 6.02° (p = 0.01; 95% CI, 1.73-10.31), respectively. At 75° there was a 10.11° difference (p < 0.01; 95% CI, 5.20-15.01) in internal rotation between the intact (13.96° [5.34°]) and the M+/ALL- (23.22° [4.46°]) conditions. There was also a 4.08° difference (p = 0.01; 95% CI, 1.14-7.01) between the intact and M-/ALL- (18.05° [7.31°]) conditions. Internal rotation differences of 6.17° and 5.43° were observed between ACL- (16.28° [6.44°]) and M+/ALL- (p < 0.01; 95% CI, 2.45-9.89) as well as between M+/ALL- and M-/ALL- (p = 0.01; 95% CI, -8.17 to -1.63). Throughout the range of flexion, there was no difference in anterior translation with progressive section of the ACL, meniscus, or ALL.
The ALL and LMPR both play a role in aiding the ACL in controlling internal rotation laxity in vitro; however, these effects seem to be dependent on flexion angle. The ALL has a greater role in controlling internal rotation at flexion angles > 30. The LMPR appears to have more of an effect on controlling rotation closer to extension.
Injury to the ALL and/or LMPR may contribute to high-grade anterolateral laxity after ACL injury. The LMPR and the ALL, along with the iliotibial tract, appear to act in concert as secondary stabilizers of anterolateral rotation and could be considered as the "anterolateral corner" of the knee.
据报道,前外侧韧带(ALL)损伤会导致前交叉韧带(ACL)损伤后出现高度的前外侧松弛。未能处理ALL损伤被认为是ACL重建后持续旋转松弛的一个原因。外侧半月板后根(LMPR)撕裂也已被证明会导致膝关节内旋增加。
问题/目的:本研究的目的是确定ALL和LMPR在控制ACL缺失膝关节内旋中的功能关系。具体而言:(1)我们询问在以下几种情况之间内旋是否存在差异:完整膝关节;ACL缺失膝关节;ACL/ALL缺失膝关节;ACL/LMPR缺失膝关节;以及ACL/ALL/LMPR缺失膝关节。(2)我们还询问在这些情况下前向平移是否存在差异。
将16个新鲜冷冻的尸体膝关节标本(8名男性,平均年龄79岁)固定在髋关节模拟器(股骨)和六自由度测力传感器(胫骨)上。将刚性光学跟踪器插入股骨近端和胫骨远端,以便在生物力学测试期间跟踪胫骨相对于股骨的运动。对股骨和胫骨上的一系列点进行数字化处理,以创建骨骼坐标系,用于计算内旋和前向平移。生物力学测试包括从完全伸展到90°屈曲对胫骨施加5 N·m的内旋力矩。使用拉力计施加90 N的前向负荷来进行前向平移。两种测试均以15°的增量在以下条件下依次进行:(1)完整;(2)ACL损伤(ACL-)。然后将标本随机分为先切断ALL的组(3)(M+/ALL-);或(4)先切断LMPR的组(M-/ALL+),然后再切断另一个结构(M-/ALL-)。在每个膝关节屈曲角度对每种切断情况进行单因素方差分析(α = 0.05)。
在0°屈曲时,存在组织切断效应,使得M-/ALL-情况下的内旋比ACL-情况下大1.24°(p = 0.03;95%置信区间[CI],0.16 - 2.70),比完整情况下大2.5°(p = 0.01;95% CI,0.69 - 3.91)。此外,与完整膝关节相比,M+/ALL-(9.99°[5.39°])和M-/ALL+(12.05°[5.34°])的平均(标准差)内旋分别大0.87°(p = 0.04;95% CI,0.13 - 3.83)和2.15°。在45°时,ACL-(19.15°[9.49°])、M+/ALL-(23.70°[7.00°])和M-/ALL-(18.80°[8.27°])情况下的内旋与完整(12.78°[9.23°])情况相比,分别相差6.37°(p = 0.02;95% CI,1.37 - 11.41)、8.47°(p < 0.01;95% CI,3.94 - 13.00)和6.02°(p = 0.01;95% CI,1.73 - 10.31)。在75°时,完整(13.96°[5.34°])和M+/ALL-(23.22°[4.46°])情况之间的内旋相差10.11°(p < 0.01;95% CI,5.20 - 15.01)。完整和M-/ALL-(18.05°[7.31°])情况之间也相差4.08°(p = 0.01;95% CI,1.14 - 7.01)。在ACL-(16.28°[6.44°])和M+/ALL-之间观察到6.17°的内旋差异(p < 0.01;95% CI,2.45 - 9.89),以及在M+/ALL-和M-/ALL-之间观察到5.43°的内旋差异(p = 0.01;95% CI,-8.17至-1.63)。在整个屈曲范围内,随着ACL、半月板或ALL的逐步切断,前向平移没有差异。
ALL和LMPR在体外均有助于ACL控制内旋松弛;然而,这些作用似乎取决于屈曲角度。ALL在屈曲角度> 30°时对内旋的控制作用更大。LMPR似乎在更接近伸展时对控制旋转有更大影响。
ALL和/或LMPR损伤可能导致ACL损伤后出现高度的前外侧松弛。LMPR和ALL与髂胫束一起,似乎作为前外侧旋转的二级稳定器协同作用,可被视为膝关节 的“前外侧角”。