Peer-review started: January 11, 2018
First decision: February 9, 2018
Revised: March 16, 2018
Accepted: May 13, 2018
Article in press: May 13, 2018
Published online: June 18, 2018
Processing time: 155 Days and 1.1 Hours
With double-bundle and anatomical single-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction for restoration of rotational knee kinematics, the need for objective clinical measurement of knee rotational laxity arises. Evaluation of knee rotation remains a challenge with intra-observer variability in the pivot shift test.
We aim to compare a non-invasive skin pointer with a knee rotation jig in cadaveric knees against a skeletally mounted marker.
Six pairs of cadaveric legs were mounted on a knee rotation jig. One Kirscher wire was driven into the tibial tubercle as a bone marker and a skin pointer was attached. Rotational forces of 3, 6 and 9 nm applied at 0°, 30°, 45°, 60° and 90° of knee flexion. Results were analysed using the Pearson correlation coefficient and paired t-test.
Total rotation recorded with the skin pointer significantly correlated with the bone marker at 3 nm at 0° (skin pointer 23.9 ± 26.0° vs bone marker 16.3 ± 17.3°, r = 0.92; P = 0.0), 30° (41.7 ± 15.5° vs 33.1 ± 14.7°, r = 0.63; P = 0.037), 45° (49.0 ± 17.0° vs 40.3 ± 11.2°, r = 0.81; P = 0.002), 60° (45.7 ± 17.5° vs 34.7 ± 9.5°, r = 0.86; P = 0.001) and 90° (29.2 ± 10.9° vs 21.2 ± 6.8°, r = 0.69; P = 0.019) of knee flexion and 6 nm at 0° (51.1 ± 37.7° vs 38.6 ± 30.1°, r = 0.90; P = 0.0), 30° (64.6 ± 21.6° vs 54.3 ± 15.1°, r = 0.73; P = 0.011), 45° (67.7 ± 20.6° vs 55.5 ± 9.5°, r = 0.65; P = 0.029), 60° (62.9 ± 22.4° vs 45.8 ± 13.1°, r = 0.65; P = 0.031) and 90° (43.6 ± 17.6° vs 31.0 ± 6.3°, r = 0.62; P = 0.043) of knee flexion and at 9 nm at 0° (69.7 ± 40.0° vs 55.6 ± 30.6°, r = 0.86; P = 0.001) and 60° (74.5 ± 27.6° vs 57.1 ± 11.5°, r = 0.77; P = 0.006). No statistically significant correlation with 9 nm at 30° (79.2 ± 25.1° vs 66.9 ± 15.4°, r = 0.59; P = 0.055), 45° (80.7 ± 24.7° vs 65.5 ± 11.2°, r = 0.51; P = 0.11) and 90° (54.7 ± 21.1° vs 39.4 ± 8.2°, r = 0.55; P = 0.079). We recognize that 9 nm of torque may be not tolerated in vivo due to pain.
We have measured knee rotation on a cadaveric knee utilising a knee rotation jig paired with a skin pointer against that of a skeletally mounted bone marker and have found a significant correlation between the two methods for the same magnitude of torque and knee flexion. We recognise that the use of the skin pointer introduces error due to movement of the soft tissue which increases with increasing torque.
Our aim is to eventually develop a portable and user-friendly device which can be used for objective measurement of knee rotation laxity in a non-invasive manner. This may entail the use of accelerometers or robotic arms to measure kinematics.