Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress 2023 EHA Congress 2023 ASCO Annual Meeting
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

At a glance: The ONWARDS insulin icodec trials

A round-up of the ONWARDS phase 3 clinical trials evaluating the novel weekly insulin icodec in people with diabetes.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy
Published in: Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy 11/2012

01-11-2012 | Knee

Objective evaluation of anterior knee laxity; comparison of the KT-1000 and GNRB® arthrometers

Authors: Michel Collette, Julie Courville, Marc Forton, Bertrand Gagnière

Published in: Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy | Issue 11/2012

Login to get access

Abstract

Purpose

Accurate measurement of laxity after anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) rupture is usually performed with the KT-1000 arthrometer, and reproducibility and reliability are discussed. A new arthrometer, the GNRB®, has been recently developed in an attempt to improve intra- and inter-examiner reproducibility. The aim of this diagnostic study was to evaluate the intra- and inter-examiner reproducibility of the GNRB® and the KT-1000.

Methods

Three protocols were designed to evaluate and compare the two arthrometers. Fifteen physiotherapists conducted tests on 15 subjects with healthy knees. The intra- and inter-reproducibility of the two tests were compared by analysis of variance and the F-test.

Results

Measure reproducibility was significantly worst with the KT-1000 than with the GNRB® (machine effect, P < 0.001) regardless of operator experience. There was no significant difference between experienced and inexperienced examiners with the GNRB® (no ‘examiners effect’). Regardless of the machine, there was a ‘side effect’ with healthy knees.

Conclusion

This clinical study demonstrates the superior intra- and inter-examiner reproducibility of the GNRB® over the KT-1000. There appears to be some technological advantages to using the GNRB® including pressure control of the patella, accuracy of the displacement transducer, control of the load on the calf, and control of hamstring activity.

Level of evidence

Diagnostic study, Level I.
Literature
1.
Ahlden M, Kartus J, Ejerhed L, Karlsson J, Sernert N (2009) Knee laxity measurements after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction, using either bone-patellartendon-bone or hamstring tendon autografts, with special emphasis on comparison over time. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 17:1117–1124PubMedCrossRef
2.
Anderson AF, Lipscomb AB (1989) Preoperative instrumented testing of the anterior and posterior knee laxity. Am J Sports Med 17:387–392PubMedCrossRef
3.
Anderson AF, Synder RB, Federspiel CF, Lipscomb AB (1992) Instrumented evaluation of knee laxity: a comparison of five arthrometer. Am J Sports Med 20:135–140PubMedCrossRef
4.
Ballantyne BT, French AK, Helmsoth SL, Kachingwe AF, Soderberg G (1995) Influence of examiner and gender on interrater reliability of KT-1000 arthrometer measurements. Phys Ther 75:898–906PubMed
5.
Benvenuti JF, Valloton JA, Meystre JL, Leyvraz PF (1998) Objective assessment of the anterior tibial translation in Lachman test position. Comparison between three types of measurement. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 6:215–219PubMedCrossRef
6.
Berry J, Kramer K, Binkley GA, Stratford P, Hunter S, Brown K (1999) Error estimate in novices and expert raters for the KT-1000 arthrometer. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 29:49–55PubMed
7.
Boyer P, Djian P, Christel P, Paoletti X, Degeorges R (2004) Fiabilité de l’arthromètre KT-1000 pour la mesure de la laxité antérieure du genou. Rev Chir Ortho 90:757–764
8.
Branch TB, Mayr HO, Browne JE, Campbell JC, Stoehr A, Jacobs CA (2010) Instrumented examination of anterior cruciate ligament injuries: minimizing flaws of the manual clinical examination. Arthroscopy 7:997–1004
9.
Daniel DM, Malcom LL, Losse G, Stone ML, Sachs R, Burks R (1985) Instrumented measurement of anterior laxity of the knee. J Bone Joint Surg 67 A:720–726
10.
Daniel DM, Stone ML, Sachs R, Malcolm M (1985) Instrumented measurement of anterior knee in patient with acute anterior cruciate ligament disruption. Am J Sports Med 13:401–407PubMedCrossRef
11.
DeFranco MJ, Bach BR (2009) A comprehensive review of partial anterior cruciate ligament tears. J Bone Joint Surg 91:198–208PubMedCrossRef
12.
Guillodo Y, Rannou N, Dubrana F, Lefèvre C, Saraux A (2008) Diagnostic of ACL rupture in an emergency department. J Trauma 65:1078–1082PubMedCrossRef
13.
Guskiewitcz KM, Perrin DH, Martin DE, Kahler DM, Gansneder BM, McCue FC (1995) Effects OF ACL reconstruction and tibial rotation on anterior knee laxity. Athl Training 30:243246
14.
Hanten WP, Pace MB (1987) Reliability of measuring anterior laxity of the knee using knee ligament arthrometer. Phys Ther 67:357–359PubMed
15.
Highgenboten CL, Jackson A, Meske NB (1989) Genucom, KT-1000 and Stryker knee laxity measuring device comparison in asymptomatic subjects. Am J Sports Med 17:743–746PubMedCrossRef
16.
17.
Hyder N, Bollen SR, Sefton G, Swann AC (1997) Correlation between arthrometric evaluation of knees using KT-1000 and telos stress radiography and functional outcome following ACL reconstruction. Knee 4:121–124CrossRef
18.
Isberg J, Faxen E, Brandsson S, Eriksson B, Karrholm J, Karlsson J (2006) KT-1000 records smaller side to side differences than RSA before and after ACL reconstruction. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 14:529–535PubMedCrossRef
19.
Jardin C, Chantelot C, Migaud H, Gougeon F, Debroucker MJ, Duquennoy A (1999) Fiabilité de l’arthromètre KT-1000 pour la mesure de la laxité antérieure du genou: analyse comparitive avec le Télos. Rev Chir Orthop 85:698–707PubMed
20.
Khan R, Konives A, Rama BS, Thomas R, Amis AA (2006) RSA can measure ACL graft stretching and migration. Clin Orthop 448:139–145PubMedCrossRef
21.
Lerat JL, Moyen B, Cladiere F, Besse JL, Adibi H (2000) Knee instability after injury of the ACL. Quantification of the Lachman test. J Bone Joint Surg 82-B:42–47
22.
Lubowitz JH, Bernardini BJ, Reid JB (2008) Comprehensive physical examination for instability of the knee. Am J Sports Med 36:577–594PubMedCrossRef
23.
Mayr H, Hoell A, Berstein A, Hube R, Zeiler C, Kalteis T, Suedkamp NP, Stoehr A (2011) Validation of a measurement device for instrumented quantification of anterior translation and rotational assessment of the knee. Arthroscopy 27:1096–1104PubMedCrossRef
24.
Myrer JW, Schulthies SS, Fellingham GW (1996) Relative and absolute reliability of the KT-2000 arthrometer for uninjured knees. Am J Sports Med 24:104–108PubMedCrossRef
25.
Pugh L, Mascarenhas R, Arneja S, Chin PYK, Leith JM (2009) Current concepts in instrumented Knee-laxity testing. Am J Sports Med 37:199–210PubMedCrossRef
26.
Robert H, Nouveau S, Gageot S, Gagnère B (2009) A new knee arthrometer, the GNRB®: experience in ACL complete and partial tears. Ortho Traumatol Surg Res 95:171–176CrossRef
27.
Schuster AJ, McNicholas MJ, Wachtl SW, McGurty DW, Jacob RP (2004) A new mechanical testing device for measuring anteroposterior knee laxity. Am J Sports Med 32:1731–1735PubMedCrossRef
28.
Sernert N, Kartus J, Kohler K, Ejerhed L, Karlsson J (2001) Evaluation of the reproducibility of the KT-1000 arthrometer. Scand J Med Sci Sport 11:120–125CrossRef
29.
Un BS, Beynnon BD, Churchill DL, Haugh LD, Risberg MA, Fleming BC (2001) A new device to measure knee laxity during weight bearing and non weight bearing conditions. J Orthop Res 19:1185–1191PubMedCrossRef
30.
Wiertsema SH, Van Hooff HJA, Migchelsen LAA, Steultjens MPM (2008) Reliability of the KT-1000 arthrometer and the Lachman test in patients with ACL rupture. Knee 15:107–110PubMedCrossRef
31.
Wrobble RR, Van Ginkel LA, Grood ES, Noyes FR (1990) Repeatability of the KT-1000 arthrometer in normal population. Am J Sports Med 18:396–399CrossRef
Metadata
Title
Objective evaluation of anterior knee laxity; comparison of the KT-1000 and GNRB® arthrometers
Authors
Michel Collette
Julie Courville
Marc Forton
Bertrand Gagnière
Publication date
01-11-2012
Publisher
Springer-Verlag
Published in
Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy / Issue 11/2012
Print ISSN: 0942-2056
Electronic ISSN: 1433-7347
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00167-011-1869-2

Other articles of this Issue 11/2012

Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy 11/2012 Go to the issue

Knee

Arthroscopically assisted retrograde drilling for osteochondritis dissecans (OCD) lesions of the knee

Sports Medicine

Acute muscle strain injuries: a proposed new classification system

Knee

Double-bundle bone-patellar tendon-bone and gracilis in ACL reconstruction

Knee

Effects of graft pretensioning in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction

Knee

Relationship of native tibial plateau anatomy with stability testing in the anterior cruciate ligament-deficient knee

Hip

The patellofemoral kinematics in patients with untreated developmental dislocation of the hip suffering from patellofemoral pain