The Synergistic Role of the Lateral Meniscus Posterior Root and the ALL in Providing Anterolateral Rotational Stability of the Knee
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Objectives: Injury to the anterolateral ligament (ALL) has been reported to contribute to high-grade anterolateral laxity following anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injury. Failure to address ALL injury has been suggested as a cause of persistent rotational laxity following ACL reconstruction. However, lateral meniscus posterior root (LMPR) tears have also has been shown to cause increased internal rotation and anterior translation of the knee. Due to the anatomic relationship of the ALL and the lateral meniscus, we hypothesize that the ALL and lateral meniscus work synergistically, and that a tear to the LMPR will have the same effect on anterolateral laxity as an ALL tear in the ACL deficient knee. Methods: Sixteen fresh frozen cadaveric knee specimens (mid -femur to mid-tibia) were potted into a hip simulator (femur) and a six degree-of-freedom load cell (tibia). Two rigid optical trackers were inserted into the proximal femur and distal tibia, allowing for the motion of the tibia with respect to the femur to be tracked during biomechanical tests. A series of points on the femur and tibia were digitized to create bone coordinate systems that were used to calculate the kinematic variables. Biomechanical testing involved applying a 5 Nm internal rotation moment to the tibia while the knee was in full extension and tested sequentially in the following three conditions: i) ACLintact; ii) Partial ACL injury (ACLam) -anteromedial bundle sectioned; iii) Full ACL injury (ACLfull). The specimens were then randomized to either have the ALL sectioned first (ALLsec) followed by the LMPRsec or vice versa. Internal rotation and anterior translation of the tibia with respect to the femur were calculated. A mixed two-way (serial sectioning by ALL section order) repeated measures ANOVA (α = 0.05). Results: Compared to the ACLintact condition, internal rotation was found to be 1.78° (p=0.06), 3.74° (p=0.001), and 3.84° (p=0.001) greater following ACLfull, LMPRsec and ALLsec respectively. LMPRsec and the ALLsec resulted in approximately 20 of additional internal rotation (p=0.004 and p=0.01, respectively) compared with the ACL deficient knee (ACLfull). No difference was observed between the ALL and LMPR sectioned states, or whether the ALL was sectioned before or after the LMPR (p=0.160). A trend of increasing anterior translation was observed when the 5 Nm internal rotation moment was applied up until the ACL was fully sectioned; however, these differences were not significant (p=0.070). Conclusion: The ALL and LMPR seem to have a synergistic relationship in aiding the ACL in controlling anterolateral rotational laxity. High-grade anterolateral laxity following ACL injury may be attributed to injuries of the ALL and/or the LMPR. During ACL reconstruction, the posterior roots of both menisci should be inspected carefully to rule out concomitant injury, and if found, should be addressed surgically to aid in both stability and chondroprotection. We suggest that the lateral meniscus should be thought of as part of the anterolateral capsulomeniscal complex (i.e., LM, ITB, and ALL) that acts as a stabilizer of anterolateral rotation in conjunction with the ACL.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,003 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».