Dataset Information

A Biomechanical Comparison Shows No Difference Between Two Knee Braces used for Medial Collateral Ligament Injuries.

ABSTRACT:

Purpose

The purpose of this study was to assess the ability of 2 commonly used knee braces to control knee valgus motion and subsequent strain on the medial collateral ligament (MCL) in a laboratory-controlled environment.

Methods

Twenty healthy individuals (6 male, 14 female; mean age, 23 ± 3 years) with no history of knee injury or brace use performed a jump landing task while wearing either no brace or 1 of 2 braces: the Playmaker and Total Range of Motion . Three-dimensional joint kinematics and kinetics were measured in our biomechanics laboratory.

Results

Significantly less knee dynamic valgus angulation was noted when using either brace (-0.51° ± 3.9° and -1.3° ± 3.2°) compared no brace (4.8° ± 3.0°). Dynamic valgus angulation did not differ significantly between the 2 braces tested, which were both not statistically different from baseline alignment. There were significant differences seen in peak knee flexion angle between each brace (77.9° ± 8.8°and 83.1° ± 8.4°), as well as between both braces and no brace (90.6° ± 11.1°). There was no significant difference in knee frontal plane moment or peak vertical ground reaction force loading among all 3 testing conditions.

Conclusions

Compared to no brace, both braces allowed significantly less dynamic valgus angulation of the knee under physiological vertical loads but were not significantly different from one another.

Clinical relevance

Knee braces are commonly used to protect the MCL when placed under physiological loads. It is important to know which braces effectively reduce valgus stress to provide the best outcomes.

SUBMITTER: Gentile JM

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8220611 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:PurposeTo quantify intraoperative joint space widening afforded by the outside-in, percutaneous release of the medial collateral ligament (MCL) and to evaluate its impact on medial compartment width and functional outcomes at 6-week follow-up for patients undergoing a partial medial meniscectomy without postoperative bracing.MethodsPatients with posteromedial meniscus tears and no evidence of ipsilateral knee pathology, undergoing partial medial meniscectomy, were enrolled. Intraoperatively, medial compartment width was quantified with fluoroscopy before and after the percutaneous MCL release with an 18-gauge spinal needle proximal to the joint line. At 6-week follow-up, valgus stress radiographs re-evaluated medial compartment width. International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) and Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) scores were completed preoperatively and at 6-week follow-up to evaluate functional outcomes. A paired sample t test performed at a 95% confidence interval (CI) was used to compare these variables.ResultsForty-two patients, mean (± standard deviation) age 55.3 ± 10.7 years, were available for analysis of intraoperative medial compartment widening. Medial compartment width increased from 5.95 ± 1.32 to 11.09 ± 1.74 mm intraoperatively after MCL release. At 6-week follow-up, radiographic assessment demonstrated a mean medial compartment width of 5.85 ± .99 mm, which represented an insignificant change compared with the preoperative value (CI -0.68 to .33, P = .474). PROMIS and IKDC scores significantly improved from baseline, with increases of 6.9 ± 12.4 (CI 2.0 to 11.8, P = .008) and 11.7 ± 17.8 (CI 4.7 to 18.8, P = .002), respectively.ConclusionsPercutaneous MCL release during knee arthroscopy improves visualization and facilitates instrumentation by providing an almost 2× wider working space within the medial tibiofemoral joint. In this study, the performance of percutaneous MCL release did not result in any complications. Radiographic and clinical resolution of iatrogenic laxity was demonstrated by 6-weeks postoperatively, without the use of postoperative bracing.Level of evidenceIV, therapeutic case series.

Project description:PurposeTo evaluate differences in repair and nonoperatively managed grade III medial collateral ligament (MCL) injuries during anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction.MethodsPatients enrolled in a multicenter prospective longitudinal group who underwent unilateral primary ACL reconstruction between 2002 and 2008 were evaluated. Patients with concomitant grade III MCL injuries treated either operatively or nonoperatively were identified. Concurrent injuries, subsequent surgeries, surgical chronicity, and MCL tear location were analyzed. Patient-reported outcomes were measured at time of ACL reconstruction and 2-year follow-up.ResultsInitially, 3,028 patients were identified to have undergone primary ACL reconstruction during the time frame; 2,586 patients completed 2-year follow-up (85%). Grade III MCL tears were documented in 1.1% (27 of 2,586): 16 operatively managed patients and 11 nonoperatively treated MCLs during ACL reconstruction. The baseline Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) and International Knee Documentation Committee scores were lower in patients who underwent operative MCL treatment. Reoperation rates for arthrofibrosis were 19% after repair and 9% after conservative management (P = .48). At 2 years, both groups significantly improved; however, the nonoperative MCL group maintained superior patient-reported outcomes in terms of minimal clinically important differences, but these differences did not reach statistical significance (KOOS sports/recreation [88.2 vs 74.4, P = .10], KOOS knee-related quality of life [81.3 vs 68.4, P = .13], and International Knee Documentation Committee [87.6 vs 76.0, P = .14]). Tibial-sided MCL injuries were associated with clinically inferior baseline scores compared with femoral-sided MCL (KOOS knee-related quality of life, 34.4 vs 18.5, P = .09), but these differences resolved by 2 years. Surgical chronicity did not influence 2-year outcome.ConclusionsBoth operative and nonoperative management of MCL tears in our patient group demonstrated clinical improvements between study enrollment and 2-year follow-up. MCL surgery during ACL reconstruction was assigned to patients with worse symptoms at enrollment and was associated with worse outcomes at 2 years. A subset of patients with severe combined ACL and medial knee injuries may benefit from operative management; however, that population has yet to be defined.Level of evidenceLevel III, retrospective cohort.