Page 34 - Demo

Chapter 232PubMed and MEDLINE(n = 1674 studies)Excluded based on title and abstract(n = 1518 studies)No English full textavailable(n = 31 studies)Full text obtained and reviewed(n = 117 studies)Excluded based on fulltext(n = 92 studies)Studies meeting inclusion criteria(n = 25 studies)Cadaver studies(n = 5 studies)ACL reconstructed(n = 15 studies)ACL deficient(n = 3 studies)ACL intact(n = 2 studies)Figure 1. Flow diagram detailing the results of the literature search.Patients with ACL deficiencyThere were four studies on subjects with ACL deficiency, see table 3.6,13,15,23 In two studies6,15 Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) was used to evaluate tibial rotation. Haughom15 applied a compressive force of 44 Newton (N) axial load and 3,35 N internal and external rotational torque and reported a significant difference between ACL deficient and ACL intact subjects. Also, a significant difference between ACL deficient knees and their contralateral intact knees was reported. Barance6, when studying unloaded knees, did not demonstrate a significant difference in rotation between ACL intact and ACL deficient subjects. Miyaji23 studied tibial rotation in subjects performing a wide based squat using 3D Computed Tomography (CT) and biplanar fluoroscopy. No significant difference was shown between ACL deficient and contralateral intact knees in terms of range of tibial rotation. Grassi13 used CAS to Mark Zee.indd 32 03-01-2024 08:56