The Ratio of Stress to Nonstress Anterior Talofibular Ligament Length on Ultrasonography: Normative Values.
anterior talofibular ligament
chronic lateral ankle instability
generalized joint laxity
normative values
sex
stress ultrasonography
Journal
Orthopaedic journal of sports medicine
ISSN: 2325-9671
Titre abrégé: Orthop J Sports Med
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101620522
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Nov 2021
Nov 2021
Historique:
received:
21
08
2021
accepted:
25
08
2021
entrez:
25
11
2021
pubmed:
26
11
2021
medline:
26
11
2021
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Stress ultrasonography (US) has been shown to be a valid procedure for evaluating chronic anterior talofibular ligament (ATFL) injury. The ratio of stress/nonstress ATFL length (ATFL ratio) as measured on US is clinically useful; however, there are no published normative data concerning this ratio. To report a normative value of the ATFL ratio on US and evaluate the relationships between sex, generalized joint laxity (GJL), and the grade of anterior drawer test (ADT). Cross-sectional study; Level of evidence, 3. The ATFL lengths were prospectively measured in the stress and nonstress positions (manual maximal anterior drawer position) for participants with noninjured ankles from March 2020 to March 2021. GJL was defined as a Beighton score ≥4. A manual ADT was also performed. The ATFL ratio was calculated, and the relationships between sex, GJL, and ADT grade were evaluated. A total of 333 ankles in 184 participants (mean age, 24.5 ± 2.7 years; range, 20-33 years) were eligible for the analysis. GJL was found in 69 ankles (20.7%). The mean ATFL ratio was 1.08 ± 0.04 (95% CI, 1.08-1.09; range, 1.01-1.24), and there was a significant difference between male (1.07 ± 0.04; 95% CI, 1.07-1.08; range, 1.02-1.23) and female (1.09 ± 0.04; 95% CI, 1.08-1.10; range, 1.01-1.24) ankles ( The normative value of the ATFL ratio on stress US was 1.07 ± 0.04 in men and 1.09 ± 0.04 in women. The ATFL ratio was affected by the presence of GJL in men but not in women. These findings will be useful for future studies seeking to establish the cutoff value of the ATFL ratio for diagnosing chronic lateral ankle stability on stress US.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Stress ultrasonography (US) has been shown to be a valid procedure for evaluating chronic anterior talofibular ligament (ATFL) injury. The ratio of stress/nonstress ATFL length (ATFL ratio) as measured on US is clinically useful; however, there are no published normative data concerning this ratio.
PURPOSE
OBJECTIVE
To report a normative value of the ATFL ratio on US and evaluate the relationships between sex, generalized joint laxity (GJL), and the grade of anterior drawer test (ADT).
STUDY DESIGN
METHODS
Cross-sectional study; Level of evidence, 3.
METHODS
METHODS
The ATFL lengths were prospectively measured in the stress and nonstress positions (manual maximal anterior drawer position) for participants with noninjured ankles from March 2020 to March 2021. GJL was defined as a Beighton score ≥4. A manual ADT was also performed. The ATFL ratio was calculated, and the relationships between sex, GJL, and ADT grade were evaluated.
RESULTS
RESULTS
A total of 333 ankles in 184 participants (mean age, 24.5 ± 2.7 years; range, 20-33 years) were eligible for the analysis. GJL was found in 69 ankles (20.7%). The mean ATFL ratio was 1.08 ± 0.04 (95% CI, 1.08-1.09; range, 1.01-1.24), and there was a significant difference between male (1.07 ± 0.04; 95% CI, 1.07-1.08; range, 1.02-1.23) and female (1.09 ± 0.04; 95% CI, 1.08-1.10; range, 1.01-1.24) ankles (
CONCLUSION
CONCLUSIONS
The normative value of the ATFL ratio on stress US was 1.07 ± 0.04 in men and 1.09 ± 0.04 in women. The ATFL ratio was affected by the presence of GJL in men but not in women. These findings will be useful for future studies seeking to establish the cutoff value of the ATFL ratio for diagnosing chronic lateral ankle stability on stress US.
Identifiants
pubmed: 34820463
doi: 10.1177/23259671211056305
pii: 10.1177_23259671211056305
pmc: PMC8607488
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
23259671211056305Informations de copyright
© The Author(s) 2021.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
One or more of the authors has declared the following potential conflict of interest or source of funding: A research grant for this study was received from Miyazaki University Hospital. AOSSM checks author disclosures against the Open Payments Database (OPD). AOSSM has not conducted an independent investigation on the OPD and disclaims any liability or responsibility relating thereto.
Références
Br J Radiol. 2014 Jan;87(1033):20130406
pubmed: 24352708
J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2010 Oct 6;92(13):2279-84
pubmed: 20926721
Br J Sports Med. 2014 Jul;48(13):1014-8
pubmed: 24255768
Orthop Traumatol Surg Res. 2018 Dec;104(8S):S213-S218
pubmed: 30268650
Arthroscopy. 2015 Aug;31(8):1540-7
pubmed: 25882180
Arthritis Rheum. 2011 Sep;63(9):2819-27
pubmed: 21547894
Am J Sports Med. 2002 May-Jun;30(3):402-9
pubmed: 12016082
J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 2012 Jul;42(7):593-600
pubmed: 22446334
Skeletal Radiol. 2010 Jan;39(1):41-7
pubmed: 19685050
Am J Sports Med. 2016 Nov;44(11):2975-2983
pubmed: 27480980
Am J Sports Med. 2001 Mar-Apr;29(2):143-50
pubmed: 11292038
Am J Sports Med. 2017 Feb;45(2):286-293
pubmed: 28146401
Foot Ankle Int. 2017 Dec;38(12):1318-1323
pubmed: 29034742
Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2014 Jul;22(7):1701-7
pubmed: 24067992
J Athl Train. 2015 Feb;50(2):193-8
pubmed: 25384002
J Athl Train. 2019 Jun;54(6):611-616
pubmed: 31161942
Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2018 Aug;26(8):2362-2370
pubmed: 29150746
Int J Sports Phys Ther. 2011 Dec;6(4):297-305
pubmed: 22163091
Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2012 Apr;470(4):957-60
pubmed: 21789709
Sports Med. 2014 Jan;44(1):123-40
pubmed: 24105612
Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2016 Apr;24(4):1022-8
pubmed: 26515772
J Clin Epidemiol. 2006 Oct;59(10):1033-9
pubmed: 16980142
Am J Sports Med. 2017 Jan;45(1):201-209
pubmed: 27573356
Int J Sports Phys Ther. 2016 Jun;11(3):378-87
pubmed: 27274424
J Athl Train. 2007 Apr-Jun;42(2):311-9
pubmed: 17710181
Sports Med. 2014 Nov;44(11):1545-56
pubmed: 24981244
J Athl Train. 2010 May-Jun;45(3):253-8
pubmed: 20446838
AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2009 Feb;192(2):487-95
pubmed: 19155415
Am J Sports Med. 2016 Dec;44(12):3152-3157
pubmed: 27496909
Am J Sports Med. 2008 Jun;36(6):1073-80
pubmed: 18326833
Am J Sports Med. 2015 Aug;43(8):1918-23
pubmed: 26045620
J Athl Train. 2019 Jun;54(6):603-610
pubmed: 31135209
J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1969 Aug;51(3):444-53
pubmed: 5820785
Br J Sports Med. 2005 Mar;39(3):e14; discussion e14
pubmed: 15728682
J Orthop Surg Res. 2018 May 22;13(1):122
pubmed: 29788978
Rheumatol Int. 2005 May;25(4):260-3
pubmed: 14745505
Surg Radiol Anat. 1994;16(1):87-91
pubmed: 8047974
Iowa Orthop J. 2000;20:46-8
pubmed: 10934624
Acta Radiol. 2012 Dec 1;53(10):1142-5
pubmed: 23051639
Biometrics. 1977 Mar;33(1):159-74
pubmed: 843571
Am J Sports Med. 2012 Apr;40(4):763-9
pubmed: 22178581
Orthop J Sports Med. 2018 May 07;6(5):2325967118770633
pubmed: 29770343
Clin J Sport Med. 2017 Mar;27(2):145-152
pubmed: 27347860