Evaluation of the effect of joint constraints on the in situ force distribution in the anterior cruciate ligament

The function of the anterior cruciate ligament was investigated for different conditions of kinematic constraint placed on the intact knee using a six‐degree‐of‐freedom robotic manipulator combined with a universal force‐moment sensor. To do this, the in situ forces and force distribution within the porcine anterior cruciate ligament during anterior tibial loading up to 100 N were compared at 30, 60, and 90° of flexion under: (a) unconstrained, five‐degree‐of‐freedom knee motion, and (b) constrained, one‐degree‐of‐freedom motion (i.e., anterior translations only). The robotic/universal force‐moment sensor testing system was used to both apply the specified external loading to the in tact joint and measure the resulting kinematics. After tests of the intact knee were completed, all soft tissues except the anterior cruciate ligament were removed, and these motions were reproduced such that the in situ force and force distribution could be determined. No significant differences in the magnitude of in situ forces in the anterior cruciate ligament were found between the unconstrained and constrained testing conditions. In contrast, the direction of in situ force changed significantly; the force vector in the unconstrained case was more parallel with the direction of the applied tibial load. In addition, the distribution of in situ force between the anteromedial and posterolateral bundles of the ligament was nearly equal for all flexion angles for the unconstrained case, whereas the anteromedial bundle carried higher forces than the posterolateral bundle at both 60 and 90° of flexion for the constrained case. This demonstrates that the constraint conditions placed on the joint have a significant effect on the apparent role of the anterior cruciate ligament. Specifically, constraining joint motion to one degree of freedom significantly alters both the direction and distribution of the in situ force in the ligament from that observed for unconstrained joint motion (five degrees of freedom). Furthermore, the changes observed in the distribution of force between the anteromedial and posterolateral bundles for different constraint conditions may help elucidate mechanisms of injury by providing new insight into the response of the anterior cruciate ligament to different types of external knee loading.

[1]  G A Livesay,et al.  A combined robotic/universal force sensor approach to determine in situ forces of knee ligaments. , 1996, Journal of biomechanics.

[2]  G A Livesay,et al.  The use of a universal force-moment sensor to determine in-situ forces in ligaments: a new methodology. , 1995, Journal of biomechanical engineering.

[3]  Freddie H. Fu,et al.  Determination of the in situ loads on the human anterior cruciate ligament , 1993, Journal of orthopaedic research : official publication of the Orthopaedic Research Society.

[4]  S Arai,et al.  The use of robotics technology to study human joint kinematics: a new methodology. , 1993, Journal of biomechanical engineering.

[5]  K. Markolf,et al.  Direct in vitro measurement of forces in the cruciate ligaments. Part I: The effect of multiplane loading in the intact knee. , 1993, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. American volume.

[6]  K. H. Chan,et al.  Ligament tension pattern in the flexed knee in combined passive anterior translation and axial rotation , 1992, Journal of orthopaedic research : official publication of the Orthopaedic Research Society.

[7]  A. Burgess Profile analysis of the Wechsler intelligence scales: a new index of subtest scatter. , 1991, The British journal of clinical psychology.

[8]  S L Woo,et al.  The effects of knee motion and external loading on the length of the anterior cruciate ligament (ACL): a kinematic study. , 1991, Journal of biomechanical engineering.

[9]  S. Woo,et al.  Treatment of the medial collateral ligament injury , 1987, The American journal of sports medicine.

[10]  G. Huba Statistics for Computer-Based Test Interpretations: Bivariate and Multivariate Uniqueness , 1986 .

[11]  G. Huba How Unusual is a Profile of Test Scores? , 1985 .

[12]  R. Warren,et al.  Medial restraints to anterior-posterior motion of the knee. , 1984, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. American volume.

[13]  E S Grood,et al.  A joint coordinate system for the clinical description of three-dimensional motions: application to the knee. , 1983, Journal of biomechanical engineering.

[14]  R. Warren,et al.  An in vitro biomechanical evaluation of anterior-posterior motion of the knee. Tibial displacement, rotation, and torque. , 1982, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. American volume.

[15]  J. Rastegar,et al.  Effect of Fixed Axes of Rotation on the Varus-Valgus and Torsional Load-Displacement Characteristics of the In-Vitro Human Knee , 1979 .

[16]  E. Chao,et al.  Justification of triaxial goniometer for the measurement of joint rotation. , 1980, Journal of biomechanics.

[17]  D A Nagel,et al.  The function of the primary ligaments of the knee in varus-valgus and axial rotation. , 1980, Journal of biomechanics.