收稿日期: 2021-06-09
网络出版日期: 2024-10-16
基金资助
国家自然科学基金(31900943);国家自然科学基金(31900961);北京大学医学部教育教学研究基金(2020YB44);北京大学第三医院优秀留学回国人员科研启动基金(BYSYLXHG2020007);北京大学医学部青年培育基金(BMU2021PY001)
版权
Biomechanics during cutting movement in individuals after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction
Received date: 2021-06-09
Online published: 2024-10-16
Supported by
Supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China(31900943);Supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China(31900961);Education and Teaching Research of Peking University Health Science Foundation of China(2020YB44);Scientific Research Foundation for Returned Scholars of Peking University Third Hospital(BYSYLXHG2020007);Youth Training Fundation of Peking University Health Science Center(BMU2021PY001)
Copyright
目的: 探究前交叉韧带(anterior cruciate ligament, ACL)重建术后12个月左右的患者在侧切动作过程中的生物力学特征，确定主要的异常生物力学特征及其机制。方法: 对16例ACL重建术后12个月左右的患者同步采集侧切动作过程中的运动学和动力学参数，计算膝关节的三维角度和三维力矩。应用配对t检验方法分析重建侧与未伤侧之间的生物力学特征差异。结果: 在侧切动作过程中，ACL重建侧的水平向后地面反作用力峰值(ACL重建侧0.380±0.071，未伤侧0.427±0.069，P = 0.003)和垂直向上地面反作用力峰值(ACL重建侧1.996±0.202，未伤侧2.110±0.182，P = 0.001)均显著小于未伤侧。与未伤侧相比，重建侧的膝关节屈曲角度较小(ACL重建侧38.3°±7.4°，未伤侧42.8°±7.9°，P < 0.001)，而外旋角度较大(ACL重建侧10.3°±2.4°，未伤侧7.7°±2.1°， P=0.008)。ACL重建侧的膝关节伸展力矩峰值(ACL重建侧0.092±0.031，未伤侧0.133±0.024，P < 0.001)和外旋力矩峰值(ACL重建侧0.005±0.004，未伤侧0.008±0.004，P=0.015)均显著小于未伤侧。结论: 在侧切动作过程中，ACL重建患者膝关节运动主要在矢状面和水平面内呈现不对称特征，重建侧呈现较小的屈膝角度、膝关节伸展力矩和外旋力矩和较大的膝关节外旋角度。
任爽 , 时会娟 , 梁子轩 , 张思 , 胡晓青 , 黄红拾 , 敖英芳 . 前交叉韧带重建术后侧切动作的生物力学特征[J]. 北京大学学报（医学版）, 2024 , 56(5) : 868 -873 . DOI: 10.19723/j.issn.1671-167X.2024.05.018
Objective: To evaluate knee biomechanics of patients about 12 months after anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction during cutting and determine the abnormal biomechanical characteristics. Methods: Sixteen males about 12 months after ACL reconstruction were recruited for this study. Three-dimensional kinematic and kinetic data were collected during cutting movement. Knee joint angles and moments were calculated. Paired t-tests were used to compare the differences in knee biomechanics between the surgical leg and nonsurgical leg. Results: The peak posterior ground reaction force (surgical leg: 0.380±0.071; nonsurgical leg: 0.427±0.069, P = 0.003) and vertical ground reaction force (surgical leg: 1.996±0.202, nonsurgical leg: 2.110±0.182, P = 0.001) were significantly smaller in the surgical leg than in the nonsurgical leg. When compared with the uninjured leg, the surgical leg demonstrated a smaller knee flexion angle (surgical leg: 38.3°± 7.4°; nonsurgical leg: 42.8°± 7.9°, P < 0.001) and larger external rotation angle (surgical leg: 10.3°± 2.4°; nonsurgical leg: 7.7°± 2.1°, P = 0.008). The surgical leg also demonstrated a smaller peak knee extension moment (surgical leg: 0.092 ± 0.031; nonsurgical leg: 0.133 ± 0.024, P < 0.001) and peak knee external rotation moment (surgical leg: 0.005 ± 0.004; nonsurgical leg: 0.008 ± 0.004, P = 0.015) when compared with the nonsurgical leg. Conclusion: The individuals with ACL reconstruction mainly showed asymmetrical movements in the sagittal and horizontal planes. The surgical leg demonstrated a smaller peak knee flexion angle, knee extension moment, and knee external rotation moment, with greater knee external rotation angle.
| 1 | Ardern CL , Taylor NF , Feller JA , et al. Fifty-five per cent return to competitive sport following anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction surgery: An updated systematic review and meta-analysis including aspects of physical functioning and contextual factors[J]. Br J Sports Med, 2014, 48 (21): 1543- 1552. |
| 2 | Wiggins AJ , Grandhi RK , Schneider DK , et al. Risk of secondary injury in younger athletes after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: A systematic review and meta-analysis[J]. Am J Sports Med, 2016, 44 (7): 1861- 1876. |
| 3 | Johnston JT , Mandelbaum BR , Schub D , et al. Video analysis of anterior cruciate ligament tears in professional american football athletes[J]. Am J Sports Med, 2018, 46 (4): 862- 868. |
| 4 | Kobayashi H , Kanamura T , Koshida S , et al. Mechanisms of the anterior cruciate ligament injury in sports activities: A twenty-year clinical research of 1 700 athletes[J]. J Sports Sci Med, 2010, 9 (4): 669- 675. |
| 5 | Yang C , Yao W , Garrett WE , et al. Effects of an intervention program on lower extremity biomechanics in stop-jump and side-cutting tasks[J]. Am J Sports Med, 2018, 46 (12): 3014- 3022. |
| 6 | Arundale AJH , Silvers-Granelli HJ , Marmon A , et al. Changes in biomechanical knee injury risk factors across two collegiate soccer seasons using the 11+ prevention program[J]. Scand J Med Sci Sports, 2018, 28 (12): 2592- 2603. |
| 7 | Dai B , Garrett WE , Gross MT , et al. The effects of 2 landing techniques on knee kinematics, kinetics, and performance during stop-jump and side-cutting tasks[J]. Am J Sports Med, 2015, 43 (2): 466- 474. |
| 8 | Hughes G , Musco P , Caine S , et al. Lower limb asymmetry after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction in adolescent athletes: A systematic review and meta-analysis[J]. J Athl Train, 2020, 55 (8): 811- 825. |
| 9 | Sharafoddin-Shirazi F , Letafatkar A , Hogg J , et al. Biomechanical asymmetries persist after ACL reconstruction: Results of a 2-year study[J]. J Exp Orthop, 2020, 7 (1): 86. |
| 10 | 李翰君, 刘卉, 张美珍, 等. 确定前交叉韧带损伤概率及危险因素的随机生物力学模型与模拟[J]. 体育科学, 2014, 34 (12): 37- 43. |
| 11 | Burland JP , Toonstra JL , Howard JS . Psychosocial barriers after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: A clinical review of factors influencing postoperative success[J]. Sports Health, 2019, 11 (6): 528- 534. |
| 12 | Gokeler A , Hof AL , Arnold MP , et al. Abnormal landing strategies after ACL reconstruction[J]. Scand J Med Sci Sports, 2010, 20 (1): e12- e19. |
| 13 | Dai B , Butler RJ , Garrett WE , et al. Anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction in adolescent patients: Limb asymmetry and functional knee bracing[J]. Am J Sports Med, 2012, 40 (12): 2756- 2763. |
| 14 | Nunley RM , Wright D , Renner JB , et al. Gender comparison of patellar tendon tibial shaft angle with weight bearing[J]. Res Sports Med, 2003, 11 (3): 173- 185. |
| 15 | Yu B , Lin CF , Garrett WE . Lower extremity biomechanics during the landing of a stop-jump task[J]. Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon), 2006, 21 (3): 297- 305. |
| 16 | Li G , Papannagari R , de Frate LE , et al. Comparison of the ACL and ACL graft forces before and after ACL reconstruction: An in vitro robotic investigation[J]. Acta Orthop, 2006, 77 (2): 267- 274. |
| 17 | Woo SL , Hollis JM , Adams DJ , et al. Tensile properties of the human femur-anterior cruciate ligament-tibia complex. The effects of specimen age and orientation[J]. Am J Sports Med, 1991, 19 (3): 217- 225. |
| 18 | Scanlan SF , Chaudhari AM , Dyrby CO , et al. Differences in tibial rotation during walking in ACL reconstructed and healthy contralateral knees[J]. J Biomech, 2010, 43 (9): 1817- 1822. |
| 19 | Pairot-de-Fontenay B , Willy RW , Elias ARC , et al. Running biomechanics in individuals with anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: A systematic review[J]. Sports Med, 2019, 49 (9): 1411- 1424. |
| 20 | Karanikas K , Arampatzis A , Brüggemann GP . Motor task and muscle strength followed different adaptation patterns after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction[J]. Eur J Phys Rehabil Med, 2009, 45 (1): 37- 45. |
| 21 | Perraton LG , Hall M , Clark RA , et al. Poor knee function after ACL reconstruction is associated with attenuated landing force and knee flexion moment during running[J]. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc, 2018, 26 (2): 391- 398. |
| 22 | Arhos EK , Capin JJ , Buchanan TS , et al. Quadriceps strength symmetry does not modify gait mechanics after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction, rehabilitation, and return-to-sport training[J]. Am J Sports Med, 2020, 49 (2): 417- 425. |
| 23 | King E , Richter C , Franklyn-Miller A , et al. Biomechanical but not timed performance asymmetries persist between limbs 9 months after ACL reconstruction during planned and unplanned change of direction[J]. J Biomech, 2018, 81, 93- 103. |
/
| 〈 |
|
〉 |
