Current state of unloading braces for knee osteoarthritis.

PURPOSE: Unicompartmental knee osteoarthritis (OA) is often treated with the prescription of an unloading knee brace to decrease pain and stiffness. Braces have been shown to improve the quality of life by applying an external moment to offset increased compressive tibiofemoral contact loads, but evidence regarding mechanical efficacy at the joint is controversial. Thus, the purpose of this study was to review the current state of unloading braces on knee mechanics, clinical impact, and long-term disease progression. METHODS: A literature search was performed through the PubMed MEDLINE database for the search terms "osteoarthritis," "knee," "brace," and derivatives of the keyword "unload." Articles published since January 1, 1980 were reviewed for their relevance. Evidence for the effectiveness of unloading braces for disease management both biomechanically and clinically was considered. RESULTS: While significant research has been done to show improvement in OA symptoms with the use of an unloading brace, current literature suggests a debate regarding the effectiveness of these braces for biomechanical change. Clinical findings reveal overall improvements in parameters such as pain, instability, and quality of life. CONCLUSION: Although clinical evidence supports brace use to improve pain and functional ability, current biomechanical evidence suggests that unloading of the affected knee compartment does not significantly hinder disease progression. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III.

Position-Specific Hip and Knee Kinematics in NCAA Football Athletes.

BACKGROUND: Femoroacetabular impingement is a debilitating hip condition commonly affecting athletes playing American football. The condition is associated with reduced hip range of motion; however, little is known about the range-of-motion demands of football athletes. This knowledge is critical to effective management of this condition. PURPOSE: To (1) develop a normative database of game-like hip and knee kinematics used by football athletes and (2) analyze kinematic data by playing position. The hypothesis was that kinematics would be similar between running backs and defensive backs and between wide receivers and quarterbacks, and that linemen would perform the activities with the most erect lower limb posture. STUDY DESIGN: Descriptive laboratory study. METHODS: Forty National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) football athletes, representing 5 playing positions (quarterback, defensive back, running back, wide receiver, offensive lineman), executed game-like maneuvers while lower body kinematics were recorded via optical motion capture. Passive hip range of motion at 90° of hip flexion was assessed using a goniometer. Passive range of motion, athlete physical dimensions, hip function, and hip and knee rotations were submitted to 1-way analysis of variance to test for differences between playing positions. Correlations between maximal hip and knee kinematics and maximal hip kinematics and passive range of motion were also computed. RESULTS: Hip and knee kinematics were similar across positions. Significant differences arose with linemen, who used lower maximal knee flexion (mean ± SD, 45.04° ± 7.27°) compared with running backs (61.20° ± 6.07°; P < .001) and wide receivers (54.67° ± 6.97°; P = .048) during the cut. No significant differences were found among positions for hip passive range of motion (overall means: 102° ± 15° [flexion]; 25° ± 9° [internal rotation]; 25° ± 8° [external rotation]). Several maximal hip measures were found to negatively correlate with maximal knee kinematics. CONCLUSION: A normative database of hip and knee kinematics utilized by football athletes was developed. Position-specific analyses revealed that linemen use smaller joint motions when executing dynamic tasks but do not demonstrate passive range of motion deficits compared with other positions. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Knowledge of requisite game-like hip and knee ranges of motion is critical for developing goals for nonoperative or surgical recovery of hip and knee range of motion in the symptomatic athlete. These data help to identify playing positions that require remedial hip-related strength and conditioning protocols. Negative correlations between hip and knee kinematics indicated that constrained hip motion, as seen in linemen, could promote injurious motions at the knee.

Measurements of bone tunnel size in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: 2D versus 3D computed tomography model.

BACKGROUND: Revision anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction requires a precise evaluation of previous tunnel locations and diameters. Enlargement of the tunnels, despite not usually affecting primary reconstruction outcomes, plays an important role in revision ACL management. Three dimensional (3D) computed tomography (CT) models are reported to be the most accurate method for identifying the tunnel position and possible conflicts with a revision tunnel placement. However, the ability of 3D CT to measure the tunnel size is still not proven. The goal of this study was to evaluate the ability of measuring the size of the bone tunnels in ACL reconstructed knees with 3D CT compared to the traditional two dimensional (2D) CT method. METHODS: Twenty-four patients had CT scans performed immediately following ACL reconstruction surgery. Their femoral tunnels size were measured by a standard 2D CT measurement and then compared with three novel 3D CT measuring methods: the best transverse section method, the best fit cylinder method and the wall thickness method. The drill size used during surgery was used as a control measure for the tunnel width. Intra-class correlation coefficients were obtained. RESULTS: The intra-class correlation coefficient and respective 95% confidence interval range (ICC [95%CI]) for the three methods compared with the drill sizes were 0.899 [0.811-0.947] for the best transverse section method, 0.745 [0.553-0.862] for the best fit cylinder method, -0.004 [-0.081 to -0.12] for the wall thickness method and 0.922 [0.713-0.97] for the 2D CT method. The mean differences compared to the drill size were 0.02 mm for the best fit transverse section method, 0.01 mm for the best fit cylinder diameter method, 3.34 mm for the wall thickness method and 0.29 mm for the 2D CT method. The intra-rater agreement (ICC [95%CI]) was excellent for the best transverse section method 0.999 [0.998-0.999] and the 2D CT method 0.969 [0.941-0.984]. CONCLUSIONS: The 3D best transverse section method presented a high correlation to the drill sizes and high intra-rater agreement, and was the best method for ACL tunnel evaluation in a 3D CT based model.