Frontal plane knee mechanics and medial cartilage MR relaxation times in individuals with ACL reconstruction: A pilot study.

BACKGROUND: The objective of this pilot study was to evaluate cartilage T1ρ and T2 relaxation times and knee mechanics during walking and drop-landing for individuals with anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACL-R). METHODS: Nine patients (6 men and 3 women, age 35.8 ± 5.4 years, BMI 23.5 ± 2.5 kg/m(2)) participated 1.5 ± 0.8 years after single-bundle two-tunnel ACL reconstruction. Peak knee adduction moment (KAM), flexion moment (KFM), extension moment (KEM), and peak varus were calculated from kinematic and kinetic data obtained during walking and drop-landing tasks. T1ρ and T2 times were calculated for medial femur (MF), and medial tibia (MT) cartilage and compared between subjects with low KAM and high KAM. Biomechanical variables were compared between limbs. RESULTS: The high KAM group had higher T1ρ for MT (p=0.01), central MT (p=0.05), posterior MF (p=0.04), posterior MT (p=0.01); and higher T2 for MT (p=0.02), MF (p=0.05), posterior MF (p=0.002) and posterior MT (p=0.01). During walking, ACL-R knees had greater flexion at initial contact (p=0.04), and lower KEM (p=0.02). During drop-landing, the ACL-R knees had lower KAM (p=0.03) and KFM (p=0.002). CONCLUSION: Patients with ACL-R who have higher KAM during walking had elevated MR relaxation times in the medial knee compartments. These data suggest that those individuals who have undergone ACL-R and have higher frontal plane loading, may be at a greater risk of knee osteoarthritis.

Evaluating rotational kinematics of the knee in ACL reconstructed patients using 3.0 Tesla magnetic resonance imaging.

INTRODUCTION: Injury to the anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) is common. While prior studies have shown that surgical reconstruction of the ACL can restore anterior-posterior kinematics, ACL-injured and reconstructed knees have been shown to have significant differences in tibial rotation when compared to uninjured knees. Our laboratory has developed an MR compatible rotational loading device to objectively quantify rotational stability of the knee following ACL injuries and reconstructions. Previous work from our group demonstrated a significant increase in total tibial rotation following ACL injuries. The current study is a prospective study on the same cohort of patients who have now undergone ACL reconstruction. We hypothesize that ACL reconstructed knees will have less tibial rotation relative to the pre-operative ACL deficient condition. We also hypothesize that ACL reconstructed knees will have greater rotational laxity when compared to healthy contralateral knees. METHODS: Patients. Six of the ACL injured patients from our initial study who had subsequently undergone ACL reconstruction were evaluated 8.1 ± 2.9 months after surgery. All patients underwent single-bundle ACL reconstruction using anteromedial portal drilling of the femoral tunnel with identical post-operative regimens. Magnetic Resonance (MR) Imaging. Patients were placed in a supine position in the MR scanner on a custom-built loading device. Once secured in the scanner bore, an internal/external torque was applied to the foot. The tibiae were semi-automatically segmented with in-house software. Tibial rotation comparisons were made within subjects (i.e. side-to-side comparison between reconstructed and contralateral knees) and differences were explored using paired sample t-tests with significance set at p=0.05. RESULTS: Regarding tibial rotation, in the ACL deficient state, these patients experienced an average of 5.9 ± 4.1° difference in tibial rotation between their ACL deficient and contralateral knees. However, there was a -0.2 ± 6.1° difference in tibial rotation of the ACL reconstructed knee when compared to the contralateral uninjured knee. Regarding tibial translation, ACL deficient patients showed a difference of 0.75 ± 1.4mm of anterior tibial translation between injured and healthy knees. After ACL reconstruction, there was a 0.2 ± 1.1mm difference in coupled anterior tibial translation of the ACL reconstructed knee compared to the contralateral knee. No significant differences in contact area between the two time points could be discerned. DISCUSSION: The objective of our study was to assess the rotational laxity present in ACL reconstructed knees using a previously validated MRI-compatible rotational loading device. Our study demonstrated that ACL reconstruction can restore rotational laxity under load. This may speak to the benefit of an anteromedial drilling technique, which allows for a more horizontal and anatomically appropriate graft position.