Dataset Information

Muscle Force Contributions to Anterior Cruciate Ligament Loading.

ABSTRACT: Anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injuries are one of the most common knee pathologies sustained during athletic participation and are characterised by long convalescence periods and associated financial burden. Muscles have the ability to increase or decrease the mechanical loads on the ACL, and thus are viable targets for preventative interventions. However, the relationship between muscle forces and ACL loading has been investigated by many different studies, often with differing methods and conclusions. Subsequently, this review aimed to summarise the evidence of the relationship between muscle force and ACL loading. A range of studies were found that investigated muscle and ACL loading during controlled knee flexion, as well as a range of weightbearing tasks such as walking, lunging, sidestep cutting, landing and jumping. The quadriceps and the gastrocnemius were found to increase load on the ACL by inducing anterior shear forces at the tibia, particularly when the knee is extended. The hamstrings and soleus appeared to unload the ACL by generating posterior tibial shear force; however, for the hamstrings, this effect was contingent on the knee being flexed greater than ~ 20° to 30°. The gluteus medius was consistently shown to oppose the knee valgus moment (thus unloading the ACL) to a magnitude greater than any other muscle. Very little evidence was found for other muscle groups with respect to their contribution to the loading or unloading of the ACL. It is recommended that interventions aiming to reduce the risk of ACL injury consider specifically targeting the function of the hamstrings, soleus and gluteus medius.

SUBMITTER: Maniar N

PROVIDER: S-EPMC9325827 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BACKGROUND:Both the anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) and the medial collateral ligament (MCL) bear load during athletic tasks of landing, cutting, pivoting, and twisting. As dynamic knee valgus is a purported mechanism for ACL injury, the MCL should bear significant strain load with valgus force. HYPOTHESIS:The intact MCL will demonstrate a significant increase in strain upon failure of the ACL at 25° of knee flexion. STUDY DESIGN:Controlled laboratory study. METHODS:In vivo kinetics/kinematics of 44 healthy athletic participants were measured to determine stratification of injury risk (ie, low, medium, and high) in 3 degrees of knee forces/moments (knee abduction moment, anterior tibial shear, and internal tibial rotation). These stratified kinetic values were input into a cadaveric impact simulator to assess ligamentous strain during a simulated landing task. Uniaxial and multiaxial load cells and differential variable reluctance transducer strain sensors were utilized to collect mechanical data for analysis. Conditions of external loads applied to the cadaveric limbs were varied and randomized. RESULTS:ACL strain increased with increased dynamic knee abduction moment (?2[5] = 14.123, P = .0148). The most extreme dynamic knee abduction moment condition demonstrated significantly higher ACL strain compared with lower loaded trials (P? .0203). Similarly, MCL strain increased with dynamic knee abduction moment (?2[5] = 36.578, P < .0001). Matched-pairs analysis compared ACL strain with MCL strain (maximum ACL strain - maximum MCL strain) and demonstrated high strain for the ACL versus the MCL (S177 = 6223.5, P < .0001). CONCLUSION:Although significant, MCL strain had minimal increase with increased dynamic knee abduction moment, and the event of ACL failure did not significantly increase MCL strain when compared with high dynamic knee abduction moment conditions in the cadaveric model. The ACL bears more strain than the MCL at increasing amounts of dynamic knee abduction moment at 25° of knee flexion, which may explain the limited concomitant MCL injury rate that can occur during a dynamic valgus collapse of the knee. CLINICAL RELEVANCE:These characteristics of ACL and MCL strain are important to understand the mechanisms that drive these injuries at the knee and will improve rehabilitation and injury prevention techniques.

Project description:Anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injury predisposes individuals to early-onset knee joint osteoarthritis (OA). Abnormal joint loading is apparent after ACL injury and reconstruction. The relationship between altered joint biomechanics and the development of knee OA is unknown.Altered knee joint kinetics and medial compartment contact forces initially after injury and reconstruction are associated with radiographic knee OA 5 years after reconstruction.Case-control study; Level of evidence, 3.Individuals with acute, unilateral ACL injury completed gait analysis before (baseline) and after (posttraining) preoperative rehabilitation and at 6 months, 1 year, and 2 years after reconstruction. Surface electromyographic and knee biomechanical data served as inputs to an electromyographically driven musculoskeletal model to estimate knee joint contact forces. Patients completed radiographic testing 5 years after reconstruction. Differences in knee joint kinetics and contact forces were compared between patients with and those without radiographic knee OA.Patients with OA walked with greater frontal plane interlimb differences than those without OA (nonOA) at baseline (peak knee adduction moment difference: 0.00 ± 0.08 N·m/kg·m [nonOA] vs -0.15 ± 0.09 N·m/kg·m [OA], P = .014; peak knee adduction moment impulse difference: -0.001 ± 0.032 N·m·s/kg·m [nonOA] vs -0.048 ± 0.031 N·m·s/kg·m [OA], P = .042). The involved limb knee adduction moment impulse of the group with osteoarthritis was also lower than that of the group without osteoarthritis at baseline (0.087 ± 0.023 N·m·s/kg·m [nonOA] vs 0.049 ± 0.018 N·m·s/kg·m [OA], P = .023). Significant group differences were absent at posttraining but reemerged 6 months after reconstruction (peak knee adduction moment difference: 0.02 ± 0.04 N·m/kg·m [nonOA] vs -0.06 ± 0.11 N·m/kg·m [OA], P = .043). In addition, the OA group walked with lower peak medial compartment contact forces of the involved limb than did the group without OA at 6 months (2.89 ± 0.52 body weight [nonOA] vs 2.10 ± 0.69 body weight [OA], P = .036).Patients who had radiographic knee OA 5 years after ACL reconstruction walked with lower knee adduction moments and medial compartment joint contact forces than did those patients without OA early after injury and reconstruction.

Dataset Information

Muscle Force Contributions to Anterior Cruciate Ligament Loading.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets