Pre-operative knee extensor and flexor torque after secondary ACL rupture: a comparative retrospective analysis.
ACL re-rupture
ACL revision
Isokinetic
Pre-rehabilitation
Strength
Journal
BMC sports science, medicine & rehabilitation
ISSN: 2052-1847
Titre abrégé: BMC Sports Sci Med Rehabil
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101605016
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
19 Jul 2022
19 Jul 2022
Historique:
received:
23
05
2022
accepted:
13
07
2022
entrez:
19
7
2022
pubmed:
20
7
2022
medline:
20
7
2022
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Secondary anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) ruptures are a relevant clinical concern after surgical treatment of a primary ACL rupture. However, there is a lack of scientific evidence related to the role of muscle strength prior to revision surgery in a second ACL rupture. The aim of this study was to assess differences in knee extensor and flexor strength in patients before primary and secondary ACL reconstruction compared to healthy controls. In total, n = 69 age, weight and sex matched individuals were included in the study: n = 23 patients with isolated primary ACL rupture, n = 23 with secondary ACL rupture, and n = 23 matched healthy controls. Maximal isokinetic knee extension and flexion torque normalized to body mass was assessed for both legs. For patients with secondary ACL ruptures, torques were reduced in the non-injured (extension: 1.94 Nm/kg vs. 2.46 Nm/kg, p < 0.05, flexion: 1.25 Nm/kg vs. 1.59 Nm/kg, p < 0.05) and the injured leg (extension: 1.70 Nm/kg vs. 2.46 Nm/kg, p < 0.05, flexion: 1.14 Nm/kg vs. 1.59 Nm/kg, p < 0.05) compared to healthy controls. For patients with a primary ACL rupture torques were reduced in the non-injured (extension: 1.92 Nm/kg vs. 2.46 Nm/kg, p < 0.05, flexion: 1.24 Nm/kg vs. 1.59 Nm/kg, p < 0.05) and the injured leg (extension: 1.38 Nm/kg vs. 2.46 Nm/kg, p < 0.05, flexion: 1.01 Nm/kg vs. 1.59 Nm/kg, p < 0.05) compared to healthy controls. There were no differences between patients with primary and secondary ruptures, except of the knee extension on the injured leg showing higher values after a secondary ACL rupture (1.38 Nm/kg vs. 1.70 Nm/kg, p < 0.05). The findings indicate that maximal knee torques were significantly reduced in patients with primary and secondary ACL ruptures before surgical reconstruction for the non-injured and injured leg as compared to healthy controls. Further investigations are needed to assess strength abilities before and after a second revision within a prospective design.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Secondary anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) ruptures are a relevant clinical concern after surgical treatment of a primary ACL rupture. However, there is a lack of scientific evidence related to the role of muscle strength prior to revision surgery in a second ACL rupture. The aim of this study was to assess differences in knee extensor and flexor strength in patients before primary and secondary ACL reconstruction compared to healthy controls.
METHODS
METHODS
In total, n = 69 age, weight and sex matched individuals were included in the study: n = 23 patients with isolated primary ACL rupture, n = 23 with secondary ACL rupture, and n = 23 matched healthy controls. Maximal isokinetic knee extension and flexion torque normalized to body mass was assessed for both legs.
RESULTS
RESULTS
For patients with secondary ACL ruptures, torques were reduced in the non-injured (extension: 1.94 Nm/kg vs. 2.46 Nm/kg, p < 0.05, flexion: 1.25 Nm/kg vs. 1.59 Nm/kg, p < 0.05) and the injured leg (extension: 1.70 Nm/kg vs. 2.46 Nm/kg, p < 0.05, flexion: 1.14 Nm/kg vs. 1.59 Nm/kg, p < 0.05) compared to healthy controls. For patients with a primary ACL rupture torques were reduced in the non-injured (extension: 1.92 Nm/kg vs. 2.46 Nm/kg, p < 0.05, flexion: 1.24 Nm/kg vs. 1.59 Nm/kg, p < 0.05) and the injured leg (extension: 1.38 Nm/kg vs. 2.46 Nm/kg, p < 0.05, flexion: 1.01 Nm/kg vs. 1.59 Nm/kg, p < 0.05) compared to healthy controls. There were no differences between patients with primary and secondary ruptures, except of the knee extension on the injured leg showing higher values after a secondary ACL rupture (1.38 Nm/kg vs. 1.70 Nm/kg, p < 0.05).
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
The findings indicate that maximal knee torques were significantly reduced in patients with primary and secondary ACL ruptures before surgical reconstruction for the non-injured and injured leg as compared to healthy controls. Further investigations are needed to assess strength abilities before and after a second revision within a prospective design.
Identifiants
pubmed: 35854326
doi: 10.1186/s13102-022-00531-0
pii: 10.1186/s13102-022-00531-0
pmc: PMC9295510
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
135Informations de copyright
© 2022. The Author(s).
Références
Ann Phys Rehabil Med. 2010 Dec;53(10):598-614
pubmed: 21112824
J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 2012 Jul;42(7):601-14
pubmed: 22402434
Am J Sports Med. 2016 Jul;44(7):1861-76
pubmed: 26772611
J Orthop Surg (Hong Kong). 2004 Dec;12(2):210-5
pubmed: 15621909
J Athl Train. 2018 Jun;53(6):535-544
pubmed: 29975571
J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 2012 Apr;42(4):304-12
pubmed: 22467065
Am J Sports Med. 2004 Mar;32(2):477-83
pubmed: 14977677
Am J Sports Med. 2016 Jun;44(6):1502-7
pubmed: 26920430
Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon). 2002 Jan;17(1):56-63
pubmed: 11779647
Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2016 Nov;48(11):2082-2089
pubmed: 27327027
Front Physiol. 2021 Oct 15;12:767941
pubmed: 34721087
Knee. 2013 Jun;20(3):208-12
pubmed: 23022031
Orthop J Sports Med. 2014 Jan 21;2(1):2325967113518305
pubmed: 26535266
J Strength Cond Res. 2018 Aug;32(8):2314-2323
pubmed: 29794892
BMJ Open Sport Exerc Med. 2017 Apr 16;3(1):e000222
pubmed: 29259807
Diagnostics (Basel). 2021 May 30;11(6):
pubmed: 34070871
Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2009 Jul;17(7):705-29
pubmed: 19452139
Sports Med. 2003;33(7):483-98
pubmed: 12762825
Arthroscopy. 2010 Jul;26(7):957-67
pubmed: 20620795
Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2017 Oct;25(10):3213-3219
pubmed: 27553297
Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2007 May;88(5):626-31
pubmed: 17466732
Am J Sports Med. 2005 Apr;33(4):492-501
pubmed: 15722287
J Sci Med Sport. 2009 Nov;12(6):622-7
pubmed: 18835221
Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon). 2010 Aug;25(7):693-9
pubmed: 20554101
Ann Transl Med. 2021 May;9(9):812
pubmed: 34268425
Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2011 Apr;19(4):634-40
pubmed: 21110004
Eur J Appl Physiol. 2008 Apr;102(6):739-45
pubmed: 18172672
Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2000 Aug;32(8):1472-9
pubmed: 10949014
J Appl Physiol (1985). 2002 Oct;93(4):1318-26
pubmed: 12235031
Br J Sports Med. 2009 May;43(5):371-6
pubmed: 19224907
Br J Sports Med. 2015 Jan;49(2):118-22
pubmed: 24687011
Am J Sports Med. 2014 Mar;42(3):641-7
pubmed: 24451111
Am J Sports Med. 2006 Sep;34(9):1512-32
pubmed: 16905673
Am J Sports Med. 2014 Jul;42(7):1567-73
pubmed: 24753238
J Strength Cond Res. 2005 Feb;19(1):51-60
pubmed: 15705045
Br J Sports Med. 1996 Jun;30(2):156-60
pubmed: 8799603
Clin J Sport Med. 2009 Jan;19(1):3-8
pubmed: 19124976
J Electromyogr Kinesiol. 2008 Aug;18(4):591-7
pubmed: 17306564
J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 2015 Dec;45(12):1017-25
pubmed: 26471854
J Orthop. 2016 Mar 24;13(2):A1-4
pubmed: 27053841
J Knee Surg. 2005 Jan;18(1):82-8
pubmed: 15742602
J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1980 Mar;62(2):259-70
pubmed: 7358757
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2005 Apr 18;(2):CD001356
pubmed: 15846618
Arthroscopy. 2007 Jan;23(1):21-8, 28.e1-3
pubmed: 17210423
BMC Sports Sci Med Rehabil. 2020 Oct 30;12(1):68
pubmed: 33292502
Sportverletz Sportschaden. 1994 Mar;8(1):25-30
pubmed: 8197541
Am J Phys Med Rehabil. 2010 Jul;89(7):541-8
pubmed: 20463561
Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2016 Jan;24(1):236-46
pubmed: 25315083
Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2009 Aug;17(8):859-79
pubmed: 19506834
Am J Sports Med. 2006 Mar;34(3):490-8
pubmed: 16382007
J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 2012 Sep;42(9):750-9
pubmed: 22813542
Clin J Sport Med. 2012 Mar;22(2):116-21
pubmed: 22343967
PLoS One. 2015 Dec 08;10(12):e0144283
pubmed: 26646385
Clin Sports Med. 2015 Apr;34(2):301-12
pubmed: 25818715