Skip to main content
Log in

Will early reconstruction prevent abnormal kinematics after ACL injury? Two-year follow-up using dynamic radiostereometry in 14 patients operated with hamstring autografts

  • Knee
  • Published:
Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy Aims and scope

Abstract

Purpose

Previous studies have reported that Anterior Cruciate Ligament (ACL) reconstruction does not restore normal tibial rotation in patients with chronic instability and repeated episodes of giving way. We hypothesised that early ACL reconstruction, using quadruple hamstring autografts, before the pivoting episodes had occurred, would protect the knee joint from developing abnormal kinematics with increased external tibial rotation during flexion.

Methods

Fourteen consecutive patients (8 men, 6 women) with a median age of 24 years (18–43), with a complete, isolated unilateral ACL rupture and an intact contralateral knee, were studied. The operations were performed by one experienced surgeon, using quadruple hamstring autografts. We used dynamic radiostereometry (RSA) with tantalum markers inserted in both the injured and the intact contralateral knee to study the pattern of knee motion during active and weight-bearing knee extension. The patients were evaluated pre-operatively and followed for 2 years after the ACL reconstruction. The anterior-posterior laxity was measured using the KT-1000.

Results

Before surgical repair of the ACL, the internal/external tibial rotation or abduction/adduction did not differ significantly between the injured and intact knees (P = 0.27–0.91). Separate studies of the anterior-posterior translation of the medial and lateral femoral flexion facet centres (MFC and LFC) relative to a fixed tibia did not reveal any significant differences between the injured and intact knees (P = 0.21–0.59). Pre-operatively, the KT-1000 laxity measurements showed a side-to-side difference of 2.5 (1.0–5.5) mm. At 2 years, the laxity side-to-side difference was 0.5 (0–3.0) mm (P = 0.001), and there were still no significant differences between the injured and intact knees in terms of internal/external tibial rotation and abduction/adduction (P = 0.13–0.60). Nor did the anterior-posterior translation of the flexion facet centres differs (P = 0.27–0.97).

Conclusion

During the first 6–8 weeks after the ACL injury, before pivoting episodes had occurred, the kinematics of the injured knee were normal and did not differ from those of the intact contralateral knee. Reconstruction of the ACL within 10 weeks after injury using quadruple hamstring autografts resulted in unchanged knee kinematics for 2 years and no difference compared with the intact contralateral knee. Surgical repair during the early phase after the injury appears to protect the knee from developing abnormal knee motion after an ACL rupture.

Level of evidence

III.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Andriacchi TP, Dyrby CO (2005) Interactions between kinematics and loading during walking for the normal and ACL deficient knee. J Biomech 38:293–298

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Beynnon B, Johnson R, Abate J, Fleming B, Nichols C (2005) Treatment of Anterior cruciate ligament injuries, Part 1. Am J Sports Med 33:1579–1602

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Beynnon B, Johnson R, Abate J, Fleming B, Nichols C (2005) Treatment of Anterior cruciate ligament injuries, Part 2. Am J Sports Med 33:1751–1767

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Bragdon CR, Malchau H, Yuan X, Perinchief R, Karrholm J, Börlin N, Estok DM, Harris WH (2002) Experimental assessment of precision and accuracy of radiostereometric analysis for the determination of polyethylene wear in a total hip replacement model. J Orthop Res 20:688–695

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Brandsson S, Karlsson J, Eriksson BI, Kärrholm J (2001) Kinematics after tear in the anterior cruciate ligament. Dynamic bilateral radiostereometric studies in 11 patients. Acta Orthop Scand 72:372–378

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Brandsson S, Karlsson J, Swärd L, Kartus J, Eriksson BI, Kärrholm J (2002) Kinematics and Laxity of the Knee Joint after Anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: pre- and postoperative radiostereometric studies. Am J Sports Med 30:361–367

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Chouliaras V, Ristanis S, Moraiti C, Stergiou N, Georgoulis AD (2007) Effectiveness of reconstruction of the anterior cruciate ligament with quadrupled hamstrings and bone-patellar tendon-bone autografts. Am J Sports Med 35:189–196

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Fleming BC, Peura GD, Abate JA, Beynnon BD (2001) Accuracy and repeatability of Roentgen stereophotogrammetric analysis (RSA) for measuring knee laxity in longitudinal studies. J Biomech 34:1355–1359

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Hefti F, Müller W, Jakob RP, Stäubli HU (1993) Evaluation of knee ligament injuries with the IKDC form. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 1:226–234

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Hunter RE, Mastrangelo J, Freeman JR, Purnell ML, Jones RH (1996) The impact of surgical timing on postoperative motion and stability following anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Arthroscopy 12:667–674

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Isberg J, Faxén E, Brandsson S, Eriksson BI, Kärrholm J, Karlsson J (2006) Early active extension after Anterior Cruciate Ligament reconstruction does not result in increased laxity of the knee. Knee Surg Sports Traum Arthrosc 14:1108–1115

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Iwaki H, Pinskerova V, Freeman MA (2000) Tibiofemoral movement 1: the shapes and relative movements of the femur and tibia in the unloaded cadaver knee. J Bone Joint Surg Br 82:1189–1195

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Jonsson H, Kärrholm J (1994) Three-dimensional knee joint movements during a step-up: Evaluation after anterior cruciate ligament rupture. J Orthop Res 12:769–779

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Jonsson H, Kärrholm J, Elmqvist LG (1989) Kinematics of active knee extension after tear of the anterior cruciate ligament. Am J Sports Med 17:792–802

    Google Scholar 

  15. Kärrholm J (1989) Roentgen stereophoto-grammetry. Review of orthopaedic applications. Acta Orthop Scand 60:491–503

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Kärrholm J, Brandsson S, Freeman MAR. (2000) Tibiofemoral movement 4: changes of axial tibial rotation caused by forced rotation at the weight-bearing knee studied by RSA. J Bone and Joint Surg. 82-B:1201-1203

  17. Kärrholm J, Gill R, Valstar E (2006) The history and future of radiostereometric analysis. Clin Orthop Rel Res 448:10–21

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Kärrholm J, Herberts P, Hultmark P, Malchau H, Nivbrant B, Thanner J (1997) Radiostereometry of hip prostheses. Review of methodology and clinical results. Clin Orthop Rel Res 344:94–110

    Google Scholar 

  19. Kärrholm J, Selvik G, Elmqvist LG, Hansson LI (1988) Active knee motion after cruciate ligament rupture. Stereoradio-graphy. Acta Orthop Scand 59:158–164

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Kärrholm J, Elmqvist LG, Selvik G, Hansson LI (1989) Chronic anterolateral instability of the knee. A roentgen stereophotogrammetric evaluation. Am J Sports Med 17:555–563

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Kärrholm J, Selvik G, Elmqvist LG, Hansson LI, Jonsson H (1988) Three-dimensional instability of the anterior cruciate deficient knee. J Bone Joint Surg 70-B:777–783

    Google Scholar 

  22. Laxdal G, Kartus J, Hansson L, Heidvall M, Ejerhed L, Karlsson J (2005) A prospective randomized comparison of bone-patellar tendon-bone and hamstring grafts for anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Arthroscopy 21:34–42

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Lohmander LS, Ostenberg A, Englund M, Roos H (2004) High prevalence of knee osteoarthritis, pain, and functional limitations in female soccer players twelve years after anterior cruciate ligament injury. Arthritis Rheum 50:3145–3152

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Mayr HO, Weig TG, Plitz W (2004) Arthrofibrosis following ACL reconstruction: reasons and outcomes. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 124:518–522

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Nilsson KG, Dahlén T. (1997) In vivo kinematics in knee replacements with fixed or mobile polyethylene bearings. Transactions of the 43rd Annual Meeting Orthopaedic Research Society. 22:261

  26. Nilsson KG, Kärrholm J, Gadegaard P (1991) Abnormal kinematics of the artificial knee, roentgen stereophotogrammetric analysis of 10 Miller-Galante and five New Jersey LCS knees. Acta Orthop Scand 62:440–446

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Onsten I, Berzins A, Shott S, Sumner DR (2001) Accuracy and precision of radiostereo-metric analysis in the measurement of THR femoral component translations: human and canine in vitro models. J Orthop Res 19:1162–1167

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. Papannagari R, Gill TJ, Defrate LE, Moses JM, Petruska AJ, Li G (2006) In vivo kinematics of the knee after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: A clinical and functional evaluation. Am J Sports Med 34:2006–2012

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Piazza SJ, Cavanagh PR (2000) Measurement of the screw-home motion of the knee is sensitive to errors in axis alignment. J Biomech 33:1029–1034

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. Raviraj A, Anand A, Kodikal G, Chandrashekar M, Pai S (2010) A comparison of early and delayed arthroscopically-assisted reconstruction of the anterior cruciate ligament using hamstring autograft. J Bone Joint Surg Br 92:521–526

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  31. Ristanis S, Stergiou N, Patras K, Tsepis E, Moraiti C, Georgoulis A (2006) Follow-up evaluation 2 years after ACL reconstruction with Bone-Patellar Tendon-Bone graft shows that excessive tibial rotation persists. Clin J Sports Med 16:111–116

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Ristanis S, Stergiou N, Patras K, Vasiliadis H, Giakas G, Georgoulis A (2005) Excessive tibial rotation during high-demand activities is not restored by Anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Arthroscopy 21:1323–1329

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Saari T, Carlsson L, Karlsson J, Kärrholm J (2005) Knee kinematics in medial arthrosis. Dynamic radiostereometry during active extension and weight-bearing. J Biomech 38:285–292

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Selvik G (1989) Roentgen Stereophotogram-metry. A method for the study of the kinematics of the skeletal system. Acta Orthop Scand suppl 232:1–51

    Google Scholar 

  35. Shelbourne KD, Patel DV (1996) Timing of surgery in anterior cruciate ligament-injured knees. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 3:148–156

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Tegner Y, Lysholm J, Lysholm M, Gillquist J (1986) A performance test to monitor rehabilitation and evaluate anterior cruciate ligament injuries. Am J Sports Med 14:156–159

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  37. Uvehammer J, Kärrholm J, Brandsson S (2000) In vivo kinematics of total knee arthroplasty: concave versus posterior-stabilised tibial joint surface. J Bone Joint Surg 82B:499–505

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Uvehammer J, Kärrholm J, Brandsson S, Herberts P, Carlsson L, Regner L (2000) In vivo kinematics of total knee arthroplasty: flat compared with concave tibial joint surfaces. J Orthop Res 18:856–864

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  39. van Dijk R, Huiskes R, Selvik G (1979) Roentgen stereophotogrammetric methods for the evaluation of the three dimensional kinematic behaviour and cruciate ligament length patterns of the human knee joint. J Biomech 12:727–731

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Valstar ER, Gill R, Ryd L, Flivik G, Börlin N, Kärrholm J (2005) Guidelines for standardization of radiostereometry (RSA) of implants. Acta Orthop Scand 76:653–672

    Google Scholar 

  41. von Porat A, Ross EM, Roos H (2004) High prevalence of osteoarthritis 14 years after an anterior cruciate ligament tear in male soccer players: a study of radiographic and patient relevant outcomes. Ann Rheum Dis 63:269–273

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Yoo JD, Papannagari R, Park SE, DeFrate LE, Gill TJ, Li G (2005) The effect of anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction on knee joint kinematics under simulated muscle loads. Am J Sports Med 33:240–246

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jonas Isberg.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Isberg, J., Faxén, E., Laxdal, G. et al. Will early reconstruction prevent abnormal kinematics after ACL injury? Two-year follow-up using dynamic radiostereometry in 14 patients operated with hamstring autografts. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 19, 1634–1642 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00167-011-1399-y

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00167-011-1399-y

Keywords

Navigation