Diagnostic Value of Lachmeter in Measuring Anterior Tibia Translation on Post-Anterior Cruciate Ligament Tear Reconstruction Compared to CT Scan

Authors

  • Marsha Ruthy Darmawan Department of Radiology, Faculty of Medicine, Udayana University, Sanglah Public General Hospital, Bali, Indonesia
  • Elysanti Dwi Martadiani Department of Radiology, Faculty of Medicine, Udayana University, Sanglah Public General Hospital, Bali, Indonesia
  • Made Dwija Putra Ayusta Department of Radiology, Faculty of Medicine, Udayana University, Sanglah Public General Hospital, Bali, Indonesia
  • Gede Raka Widiana Department of Internal Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Udayana University, Sanglah Public General Hospital, Bali, Indonesia
  • Celleen Rei Setiawan Department of Orthopaedic and Traumatology, Faculty of Medicine, Udayana University, Sanglah Public General Hospital, Bali, Indonesia
  • Gusti Ngurah Wien Aryana Department of Orthopaedic and Traumatology, Faculty of Medicine, Udayana University, Sanglah Public General Hospital, Bali, Indonesia

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.3889/oamjms.2022.9758

Keywords:

Anterior tibia translation, Lachmeter, CT scan

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Anterior translation of the tibia (ATT) is a secondary sign of an anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) tear. With advances in technology, new tools such as the Lachmeter are expected to replace computed tomography scanning (CT scan) in measuring the ATT.

AIM: This study aims to determine the diagnostic validity of the Lachmeter in measuring the ATT 6–12 months after ACL tear reconstruction.

MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective diagnostic test with a Lachmeter was used to measure ATT in patients 6–12 months after ACL tear reconstruction, compared with the gold standard CT scan and using a consecutive sampling technique. The optimal cutoff value of ATT was determined with Lachmeter afterwards. Statistical Package for the Social Sciences version 21.0 was used for the data analysis.

RESULTS: There are 28 persons with a positive ATT (≥ 5 mm) and four people with a negative ATT (<5 mm) measured using CT scan out of 32 samples. The optimal cutoff of ATT with Lachmeter is ≥7.28 mm (Area under curve = 0.88, 95% CI, 0.67–1.00 and p = 0.004) with a sensitivity of 84.62%, specificity 83.33%, positive predictive value 95.65%, negative predictive value 55.56%, positive likelihood ratio (LR) 5.08, negative LR 0.18, and 84.38% accuracy.

CONCLUSION: Lachmeter is a new tool for determining ATT that is highly efficient and easy to use. With good sensitivity and specificity values, this new tool has been proven to be very good at measuring ATT compared to CT scan as the gold standard.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Metrics

Metrics Loading ...

Plum Analytics Artifact Widget Block

References

Vohra S, Arnold G, Doshi S, Marcantonio D. Normal MR imaging anatomy of the knee. Magn Reson Imaging Clin N Am. 2011;19(3):637-53, ix-x. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mric.2011.05.012 PMid:21816336 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mric.2011.05.012

Gans I, Retzky JS, Jones LC, Tanaka MJ. Epidemiology of recurrent anterior cruciate ligament injuries in National Collegiate Athletic Association Sports: The Injury Surveillance Program, 2004-2014. Orthop J Sports Med. 2018;6(6):1-7. https://doi.org/10.1177/2325967118777823 PMid:29977938 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/2325967118777823

Scheffler SU, Unterhauser FN, Weiler A. Graft remodeling and ligamentization after cruciate ligament reconstruction. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2008;16(9):834-42. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00167-008-0560-8 PMid:18516592 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00167-008-0560-8

Perry D, O’Connell M. Evaluation and management of anterior cruciate ligament injuries: A focused review. Osteopath Fam Physician. 2015;7(2):13-8.

Ericsson D, Östenberg AH, Andersson E, Alricsson M. Test-retest reliability of repeated knee laxity measurements in the acute phase following a knee trauma using a Rolimeter. J Exerc Rehabil. 2017;13(5):550-8. https://doi.org/10.12965/jer.1735104.552 PMid:29114530 DOI: https://doi.org/10.12965/jer.1735104.552

Heffernan EJ, Moran DE, Gerstenmaier JF, McCarthy CJ, Hegarty C, McMahon CJ. Accuracy of 64-section MDCT in the diagnosis of cruciate ligament tears. Clin Radiol. 2017;72(7):611. e1-8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.crad.2017.01.006 PMid:28214478 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.crad.2017.01.006

Hootman JM, Dick R, Agel J. Epidemiology of collegiate injuries for 15 sports: summary and recommendations for injury prevention initiatives. J Athl Train. 2007;42(2):311-9. PMid:17710181

Moses B, Orchard J, Orchard J. Systematic review: Annual incidence of ACL injury and surgery in various populations. Res Sports Med. 2012;20(3):157-79. https://doi.org/10.1080/15438627.2012.680633 PMid:22742074 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/15438627.2012.680633

Singh N. International epidemiology of anterior cruciate ligament injuries. Ortho Res Online J. 2018;1(5):94-6. DOI: https://doi.org/10.31031/OPROJ.2018.01.000525

Claes S, Verdonk P, Forsyth R, Bellemans J. The “ligamentization” process in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: What happens to the human graft? A systematic review of the literature. Am J Sports Med. 2011;39(11):2476-83. https://doi.org/10.1177/0363546511402662 PMid:21515806 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0363546511402662

Downloads

Published

2022-07-24

How to Cite

1.
Darmawan MR, Martadiani ED, Ayusta MDP, Widiana GR, Setiawan CR, Aryana GNW. Diagnostic Value of Lachmeter in Measuring Anterior Tibia Translation on Post-Anterior Cruciate Ligament Tear Reconstruction Compared to CT Scan. Open Access Maced J Med Sci [Internet]. 2022 Jul. 24 [cited 2024 Apr. 25];10(B):1813-7. Available from: https://oamjms.eu/index.php/mjms/article/view/9758