Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Multicenter Study
. 2019 Jul;47(9):2077-2085.
doi: 10.1177/0363546519857076.

Anterior and Rotational Knee Laxity Does Not Affect Patient-Reported Knee Function 2 Years After Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction

Robert Magnussen  1 , Emily K Reinke  1 , Laura J Huston  1 ; MOON Knee Group  1 ; Jack T Andrish  1 , Charles L Cox  1 , Warren R Dunn  1 , David C Flanigan  1 , Timothy Hewett  1 , Morgan H Jones  1 , Christopher C Kaeding  1 , Dawn Lorring  1 , Matthew J Matava  1 , Richard D Parker  1 , Angela Pedroza  1 , Emily Preston  1 , Brian Richardson  1 , Bettina Schroeder  1 , Matthew V Smith  1 , Rick W Wright  1 , Kurt P Spindler  1
Affiliations
Multicenter Study

Anterior and Rotational Knee Laxity Does Not Affect Patient-Reported Knee Function 2 Years After Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction

Robert Magnussen et al. Am J Sports Med. 2019 Jul.

Abstract

Background: While a primary goal of anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction is to reduce pathologically increased anterior and rotational knee laxity, the relationship between knee laxity after ACL reconstruction and patient-reported knee function remains unclear.

Hypothesis: There would be no significant correlation between the degree of residual anterior and rotational knee laxity and patient-reported outcomes (PROs) 2 years after primary ACL reconstruction.

Study design: Cross-sectional study; Level of evidence, 3.

Methods: From a prospective multicenter nested cohort of patients, 433 patients younger than 36 years of age injured in sports with no history of concomitant ligament surgery, revision ACL surgery, or surgery of the contralateral knee were identified and evaluated at a minimum 2 years after primary ACL reconstruction. Each patient underwent Lachman and pivot-shift evaluation as well as a KT-1000 arthrometer assessment along with Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score and subjective International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) scores. A proportional odds logistic regression model was used to predict each 2-year PRO score, controlling for preoperative score, age, sex, body mass index, smoking, Marx activity score, education, subsequent surgery, meniscal and cartilage status, graft type, and range of motion asymmetry. Measures of knee laxity were independently added to each model to determine correlation with PROs.

Results: Side-to-side manual Lachman differences were IKDC A in 246 (57%) patients, IKDC B in 183 (42%) patients, and IKDC C in 4 (<1%) patients. Pivot-shift was classified as IKDC A in 209 (48%) patients, IKDC B in 183 (42%) patients, and IKDC C in 11 (2.5%) patients. The mean side-to-side KT-1000 difference was 2.0 ± 2.6 mm. No significant correlations were noted between pivot-shift or anterior tibial translation as assessed by Lachman or KT-1000 and any PRO. All predicted differences in PROs based on IKDC A versus B pivot-shift and anterior tibial translation were less than 4 points.

Conclusion: Neither the presence of IKDC A versus B pivot-shift nor increased anterior tibial translation of up to 6 mm is associated with clinically relevant decreases in PROs 2 years after ACL reconstruction.

Keywords: ACL reconstruction; knee laxity; patient-reported outcomes.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1:
Figure 1:
STROBE Diagram
Figure 2:
Figure 2:
KT Histogram
Figure 3:
Figure 3:
Predicted KT
Figure 4:
Figure 4:
Lachman testing
Figure 5:
Figure 5:
rotational laxity as assessed with the pivot-shift
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Amano K, Pedoia V, Su F, Souza RB, Li X, Ma CB. Persistent Biomechanical Alterations After ACL Recontsruction Are Associated With Early Cartilage Matrix Changes Detected by Quantitative MR. Orthop J Sports Med. 2016. April 28;4(4):2325967116644421. doi: 10.1177/2325967116644421. eCollection 2016 Apr. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Amis AA. The functions of the fibre bundles of the anterior cruciate ligament in anterior drawer, rotational laxity and the pivot shift. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2012;20(4):613–620. - PubMed
    1. Arner JW, Irvine JN, Zheng L, et al. The Effects of Anterior Cruciate Ligament Deficiency on the Meniscus and Articular Cartilage: A Novel Dynamic In Vitro Pilot Study. Orthop J Sports Med. 2016;4(4):2325967116639895. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Culvenor AG, Perraton L, Guermazi A, et al. Knee kinematics and kinetics are associated with early patellofemoral osteoarthritis following anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Osteoarthritis Cartilage. 2016;24(9):1548–1553. - PubMed
    1. Hefti F, Muller W, Jakob RP, Staubli HU. Evaluation of knee ligament injuries with the IKDC form. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 1993;1(3–4):226–234. - PubMed

Publication types

MeSH terms