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
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

At a glance: The STEP trials

A round-up of the STEP phase 3 clinical trials evaluating semaglutide for weight loss in people with overweight or obesity.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy
Published in: Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy 4/2015

01-04-2015 | Knee

Rolimeter measurements are suitable as substitutes to stress radiographs in the evaluation of posterior knee laxity

Authors: Jürgen Höher, Ralph Akoto, Philip Helm, Sven Shafizadeh, Bertil Bouillon, Maurice Balke

Published in: Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy | Issue 4/2015

Login to get access

Abstract

Purpose

The quantification of posterior knee laxity is crucial in the evaluation of injuries to the posterior cruciate ligament (PCL) as it has important implications to the treatment for these injuries. The objective of this study was to compare the test results of stress radiography and instrumented drawer testing (Rolimeter) for the assessment of posterior knee laxity in patients with PCL injury.

Methods

In 45 patients with an injury to the PCL, lateral radiographs of both knees were obtained under anterior and posterior tibial load (150 N) using a standardized approach. Patients with injury of the ACL to either knee were excluded from the study. During the same clinic visit, an instrumented measurement of anterior–posterior knee laxity was performed at 90° of knee flexion by an experienced examiner using the Rolimeter device. The mean side-to-side differences (SSD) of both (radiographic and instrumented) measurements were compared to each other, and the correlation was calculated using the Pearson coefficient.

Results

The SSD (affected/healthy side) of posterior translation determined from the radiographs was 8.2 ± 3.2 mm, and the SSD of the instrumented measurement testing was 7.6 ± 3.2 mm. The mean difference between radiographic and Rolimeter test results was 1.8 ± 1.5 mm. The Pearson’s correlation coefficient revealed a good correlation between both measurements of 0.74.

Conclusions

It may be suggested by the results of this study that under the absence of an ACL injury and a fixed posterior drawer sign, the Rolimeter is a suitable tool to assess the posterior laxity of the knee in the clinical setting. Its advantages are the absence of radiation to the patient, its availability, and the low cost. Therefore, the Rolimeter device may serve as a valuable alternative to stress radiography in the evaluation of PCL-injured patients.

Level of evidence

II.
Literature
1.
Adachi N, Ochi M, Sumen Y, Deie M, Murakami Y, Uchio Y (2003) Temporal changes in posterior laxity after isolated posterior cruciate ligament injury: 35 patients examined by stress radiography and MRI. Acta Orthop Scand 74(6):683–688CrossRefPubMed
2.
Balasch H, Schiller M, Friebel H, Hoffmann F (1999) Evaluation of anterior knee joint instability with the Rolimeter. A test in comparison with manual assessment and measuring with the KT-1000 arthrometer. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 7(4):204–208CrossRefPubMed
3.
Beldame J, Mouchel S, Bertiaux S, Adam JM, Mouilhade F, Roussignol X, Dujardin F (2012) Anterior knee laxity measurement: comparison of passive stress radiographs Telos((R)) and “Lerat”, and GNRB((R)) arthrometer. Orthop Traumatol Surg Res 98(7):744–750CrossRefPubMed
4.
5.
Daniel DM, Stone ML, Barnett P, Sachs R (1988) Use of the quadriceps active test to diagnose posterior cruciate-ligament disruption and measure posterior laxity of the knee. J Bone Jt Surg Am 70(3):386–391
6.
Fleming B, Brattbakk B, Peura G, Badger G, Beynnon B (2002) Measurement of anterior–posterior knee laxity: a comparison of three techniques. J Orthop Res 20(3):421–426CrossRefPubMed
7.
Ganko A, Engebretsen L, Ozer H (2000) The Rolimeter: a new arthrometer compared with the KT-1000. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 8(1):36–39CrossRefPubMed
8.
Garavaglia G, Lubbeke A, Dubois-Ferriere V, Suva D, Fritschy D, Menetrey J (2007) Accuracy of stress radiography techniques in grading isolated and combined posterior knee injuries: a cadaveric study. Am J Sports Med 35(12):2051–2056CrossRefPubMed
9.
Harner CD, Hoher J (1998) Evaluation and treatment of posterior cruciate ligament injuries. Am J Sports Med 26(3):471–482PubMed
10.
Hewett TE, Noyes FR, Lee MD (1997) Diagnosis of complete and partial posterior cruciate ligament ruptures. Stress radiography compared with KT-1000 arthrometer and posterior drawer testing. Am J Sports Med 25(5):648–655CrossRefPubMed
11.
Huber FE, Irrgang JJ, Harner C, Lephart S (1997) Intratester and intertester reliability of the KT-1000 arthrometer in the assessment of posterior laxity of the knee. Am J Sports Med 25(4):479–485CrossRefPubMed
12.
Jacobsen K (1976) Stress radiographical measurement of the anteroposterior, medial and lateral stability of the knee joint. Acta Orthop Scand 47(3):335–344CrossRefPubMed
13.
Margheritini F, Mancini L, Mauro CS, Mariani PP (2003) Stress radiography for quantifying posterior cruciate ligament deficiency. Arthroscopy 19(7):706–711CrossRefPubMed
14.
Papandreou MG, Antonogiannakis E, Karabalis C, Karliaftis K (2005) Inter-rater reliability of Rolimeter measurements between anterior cruciate ligament injured and normal contra lateral knees. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 13(7):592–597CrossRefPubMed
15.
Pugh L, Mascarenhas R, Arneja S, Chin PY, Leith JM (2009) Current concepts in instrumented knee-laxity testing. Am J Sports Med 37(1):199–210CrossRefPubMed
16.
Rangger C, Daniel DM, Stone ML, Kaufman K (1993) Diagnosis of an ACL disruption with KT-1000 arthrometer measurements. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 1(1):60–66CrossRefPubMed
17.
Schulz MS, Russe K, Lampakis G, Strobel MJ (2005) Reliability of stress radiography for evaluation of posterior knee laxity. Am J Sports Med 33(4):502–506CrossRefPubMed
18.
Schuster AJ, McNicholas MJ, Wachtl SW, McGurty DW, Jakob RP (2004) A new mechanical testing device for measuring anteroposterior knee laxity. Am J Sports Med 32(7):1731–1735CrossRefPubMed
19.
Sorensen OG, Larsen K, Jakobsen BW, Kold S, Hansen TB, Lind M, Soballe K (2011) The combination of radiostereometric analysis and the telos stress device results in poor precision for knee laxity measurements after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 19(3):355–362CrossRefPubMed
20.
Staubli HU, Jakob RP (1990) Posterior instability of the knee near extension. A clinical and stress radiographic analysis of acute injuries of the posterior cruciate ligament. J Bone Jt Surg Br 72(2):225–230
21.
Strobel MJ, Castillo RJ, Weiler A (2001) Reflex extension loss after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction due to femoral “high noon” graft placement. Arthroscopy 17(4):408–411CrossRefPubMed
22.
Strobel MJ, Weiler A, Eichhorn HJ (2000) Diagnosis and therapy of fresh and chronic posterior cruciate ligament lesions. Chirurg 71(9):1066–1081CrossRefPubMed
23.
Strobel MJ, Weiler A, Schulz MS, Russe K, Eichhorn HJ (2002) Fixed posterior subluxation in posterior cruciate ligament-deficient knees: diagnosis and treatment of a new clinical sign. Am J Sports Med 30(1):32–38PubMed
Metadata
Title
Rolimeter measurements are suitable as substitutes to stress radiographs in the evaluation of posterior knee laxity
Authors
Jürgen Höher
Ralph Akoto
Philip Helm
Sven Shafizadeh
Bertil Bouillon
Maurice Balke
Publication date
01-04-2015
Publisher
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Published in
Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy / Issue 4/2015
Print ISSN: 0942-2056
Electronic ISSN: 1433-7347
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00167-014-2901-0

Other articles of this Issue 4/2015

Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy 4/2015 Go to the issue

Knee

Biomechanical comparison of rotational activities between anterior cruciate ligament- and posterior cruciate ligament-reconstructed patients

Letter to the Editor

Is it meaningful to compare the difference in condyle widths between men and women?

Knee

Quadriceps corticomotor excitability following an experimental knee joint effusion

Knee

Dynamic knee stability and ballistic knee movement after ACL reconstruction: an application on instep soccer kick

Knee

Regional mechanical properties of human patellar tendon allografts

Editorial

Three cheers for the pain pump?