4.5 Article

In vivo cartilage contact strains in patients with lateral ankle instability

期刊

JOURNAL OF BIOMECHANICS
卷 43, 期 13, 页码 2561-2566

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.jbiomech.2010.05.013

关键词

Lateral ankle instability; Cartilage mechanics; Contact strains

资金

  1. National Institutes of Health [R03AR055659]
  2. Division of Orthopaedics
  3. Department of Radiology

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Damage to the anterior talofibular ligament (ATFL) and cacaneofibular ligament (CFL) during an ankle sprain may be linked to the development of osteoarthritis. Although altered tibiotalar kinematics have been demonstrated, the effects of lateral ankle instability (LAI) on in vivo cartilage strains have not been described. We hypothesized that peak cartilage strains increase, and the location is shifted in patients with ATFL injuries. We used 3-D MRI models and biplanar fluoroscopy to evaluate in vivo cartilage contact strains in seven patients with unilateral LAI. Subjects had chronic unilateral ATFL injury or combined ATFL and CFL injury, and were evaluated with increasing load while stepping onto a force plate. Peak cartilage strain and the location of the peak strain were measured using the contralateral normal ankle as a control. Ankles with LAI demonstrated significantly increased peak strain when compared with ATFL-intact controls. For example, at 100% body weight, peak strain was 29 +/- 8% on the injured side compared to 21 +/- 5% on the intact side. The position of peak strain on the injured ankle also showed significant anterior translation and medial translation. At 100% body weight, the location of peak strain in the injured ankle translated anteriorly by 15.5 +/- 7.1 mm and medially by 12.9 +/- 4.3 mm relative to the intact ankle. These changes correspond to the region of clinically observed osteoarthritis. Chronic LAI, therefore, may contribute to the development of tibiotalar cartilage degeneration due to altered cartilage strains. (C) 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据