|
|
||||||||
Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools. |
|||||||||
Biomechanics Section, Mechanical Engineering Department, Imperial College, London, England
* Address correspondence and reprint requests to Andrew A. Amis, DSc(Eng), Biomechanics Section, Mechanical Engineering Department, Imperial College of Science, Technology and Medicine, London SW7 2BX, England
The position of the fibula around the proximal tibia varies in different people; it was therefore hypothesized that this variation would affect the orientation of the lateral collateral ligament and the popliteofibular ligament complex. This hypothesis was studied in 10 cadaveric knees by measuring the orientation and length changes in these structures as the knee was flexed. The data were correlated with tibiofibular joint position. The strength of the ligaments was also tested. There were significant correlations between fibular head position and ligament orientation with the knee extended. The lateral collateral ligament slackened significantly with knee flexion, whereas the popliteofibular ligament complex did not. The structures became significantly steeper in the sagittal plane as the knee was flexed. The lateral collateral ligament passed through vertical at 70° of knee flexion and was thus poorly oriented to withstand tibial external rotation. The lateral collateral and popliteofibular ligaments had tensile strengths of 309 and 186 N, respectively. The popliteofibular ligament is dominant when the knee is flexed, because of the slackening of the lateral collateral ligament, and so it should always be reconstructed. The anatomic variation causes some knees to have better ligament orientations to withstand posterolateral tibial displacements and, conversely, other knees may be inherently more difficult to stabilize by reconstruction.
This article has been cited by other articles:
![]() |
S. Apsingi, T. Nguyen, A. M. J. Bull, A. Unwin, D. J. Deehan, and A. A. Amis Control of Laxity in Knees With Combined Posterior Cruciate Ligament and Posterolateral Corner Deficiency: Comparison of Single-Bundle Versus Double-Bundle Posterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction Combined With Modified Larson Posterolateral Corner Reconstruction Am. J. Sports Med., March 1, 2008; 36(3): 487 - 494. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
C. B. Chang, S. C. Seong, S. Lee, J. H. Yoo, Y. K. Park, and M. C. Lee Novel Methods for Diagnosis and Treatment of Posterolateral Rotatory Instability of the Knee J. Bone Joint Surg. Am., October 1, 2007; 89(suppl_3): 2 - 14. [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
K. D. Shelbourne, M. S. Haro, and T. Gray Knee Dislocation With Lateral Side Injury: Results of an En Masse Surgical Repair Technique of the Lateral Side Am. J. Sports Med., July 1, 2007; 35(7): 1105 - 1116. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
R. P. Csintalan, A. Ehsan, M. H. McGarry, D. F. Fithian, and T. Q. Lee Biomechanical and Anatomical Effects of an External Rotational Torque Applied to the Knee: A Cadaveric Study Am. J. Sports Med., October 1, 2006; 34(10): 1623 - 1629. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
W. J. Ciccone II, D. R. Bratton, D. M. Weinstein, D. L. Walden, and J. J. Elias Structural Properties of Lateral Collateral Ligament Reconstruction at the Fibular Head Am. J. Sports Med., January 1, 2006; 34(1): 24 - 28. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
T. Nau, Y. Chevalier, N. Hagemeister, J. A. deGuise, and N. Duval Comparison of 2 Surgical Techniques of Posterolateral Corner Reconstruction of the Knee Am. J. Sports Med., December 1, 2005; 33(12): 1838 - 1845. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
R. F. LaPrade, T. S. Bollom, F. A. Wentorf, N. J. Wills, and K. Meister Mechanical Properties of the Posterolateral Structures of the Knee Am. J. Sports Med., September 1, 2005; 33(9): 1386 - 1391. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
| HOME | HELP | CONTACT US | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |