» Articles » PMID: 28712025

Side-to-side Asymmetries in Landing Mechanics from a Drop Vertical Jump Test Are Not Related to Asymmetries in Knee Joint Laxity Following Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction

Overview
Publisher Wiley
Date 2017 Jul 17
PMID 28712025
Citations 12
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Purpose: Asymmetries in knee joint biomechanics and increased knee joint laxity in patients following anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) are considered risk factors for re-tear or early onset of osteoarthritis. Nevertheless, the relationship between these factors has not been established. The aim of the study was to compare knee mechanics during landing from a bilateral drop vertical jump in patients following ACLR and control participants and to study the relationship between side-to-side asymmetries in landing mechanics and knee joint laxity.

Methods: Seventeen patients following ACLR were evaluated and compared to 28 healthy controls. Knee sagittal and frontal plane kinematics and kinetics were evaluated using three-dimensional motion capture (200 Hz) and two synchronized force platforms (1000 Hz). Static anterior and internal rotation knee laxities were measured for both groups and legs using dedicated arthrometers. Group and leg differences were investigated using a mixed model analysis of variance. The relationship between side-to-side differences in sagittal knee power/energy absorption and knee joint laxities was evaluated using univariate linear regression.

Results: A significant group-by-leg interaction (p = 0.010) was found for knee sagittal plane energy absorption, with patients having 25% lower values in their involved compared to their non-involved leg (1.22 ± 0.39 vs. 1.62 ± 0.40 J kg). Furthermore, knee sagittal plane energy absorption was 18% lower at their involved leg compared to controls (p = 0.018). Concomitantly, patients demonstrated a 27% higher anterior laxity of the involved knee compared to the non-involved knee, with an average side-to-side difference of 1.2 mm (p < 0.001). Laxity of the involved knee was also 30% higher than that of controls (p < 0.001) (leg-by-group interaction: p = 0.002). No relationship was found between sagittal plane energy absorption and knee laxity.

Conclusions: Nine months following surgery, ACLR patients were shown to employ a knee unloading strategy of their involved leg during bilateral landing. However, this strategy was unrelated to their increased anterior knee laxity. Side-to-side asymmetries during simple bilateral landing tasks may put ACLR patients at increased risk of second ACL injury or early-onset osteoarthritis development. Detecting and correcting asymmetric landing strategies is highly relevant in the framework of personalized rehabilitation, which calls for complex biomechanical analyses to be applied in clinical routine.

Level Of Evidence: III.

Citing Articles

Incidence of Osteoarthritis Between ACL Reconstruction With Different Graft Types and Between ACL Reconstruction and Repair: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.

Vendrig T, Keizer M, Brouwer R, Hoogeslag R Orthop J Sports Med. 2024; 12(8):23259671241258775.

PMID: 39157020 PMC: 11328256. DOI: 10.1177/23259671241258775.


Jumping into recovery: A systematic review and meta-analysis of discriminatory and responsive force plate parameters in individuals following anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction during countermovement and drop jumps.

Labban W, Manaseer T, Golberg E, Sommerfeldt M, Nathanail S, Dennett L J Exp Orthop. 2024; 11(2):e12018.

PMID: 38572392 PMC: 10986632. DOI: 10.1002/jeo2.12018.


Abnormal Lower Limb Biomechanics During a Bilateral Vertical Jump Despite the Symmetry in Single-Leg Vertical Hop Height in Athletes After ACL Reconstruction.

Chen P, Wang L, Dong S, Ding Y, Zuo H, Jia S Orthop J Sports Med. 2024; 12(2):23259671241230989.

PMID: 38414664 PMC: 10898320. DOI: 10.1177/23259671241230989.


Knee Strength Assessment and Clinical Evaluation Could Predict Return to Running after Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction Using Patellar Tendon Procedure.

Dauty M, Menu P, Daley P, Grondin J, Quinette Y, Crenn V Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2022; 19(20).

PMID: 36293974 PMC: 9603555. DOI: 10.3390/ijerph192013396.


Fear of Reinjury Following Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction Is Manifested in Muscle Activation Patterns of Single-Leg Side-Hop Landings.

Markstrom J, Grinberg A, Hager C Phys Ther. 2021; 102(2).

PMID: 34554253 PMC: 8860189. DOI: 10.1093/ptj/pzab218.


References
1.
Shultz S, Schmitz R . Effects of transverse and frontal plane knee laxity on hip and knee neuromechanics during drop landings. Am J Sports Med. 2009; 37(9):1821-30. PMC: 2894638. DOI: 10.1177/0363546509334225. View

2.
Mouton C, Seil R, Meyer T, Agostinis H, Theisen D . Combined anterior and rotational laxity measurements allow characterizing personal knee laxity profiles in healthy individuals. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2014; 23(12):3571-7. PMC: 4661198. DOI: 10.1007/s00167-014-3244-6. View

3.
Nyland J, Klein S, Caborn D . Lower extremity compensatory neuromuscular and biomechanical adaptations 2 to 11 years after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Arthroscopy. 2010; 26(9):1212-25. DOI: 10.1016/j.arthro.2010.01.003. View

4.
Schmitt L, Paterno M, Ford K, Myer G, Hewett T . Strength Asymmetry and Landing Mechanics at Return to Sport after Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2014; 47(7):1426-34. PMC: 4418954. DOI: 10.1249/MSS.0000000000000560. View

5.
Wright R, Dunn W, Amendola A, Andrish J, Bergfeld J, Kaeding C . Risk of tearing the intact anterior cruciate ligament in the contralateral knee and rupturing the anterior cruciate ligament graft during the first 2 years after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a prospective MOON cohort study. Am J Sports Med. 2007; 35(7):1131-4. DOI: 10.1177/0363546507301318. View