ArticleFrontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology2024
Why do patients with isolated PCL rupture experience no subjective knee joint instability during walking? An
Article in Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: The aim of this study is to assess the kinematic changes in the knee joint during walking in patients with isolated PCL-deficiency (PCLD) to determine the presence of walking-related joint instability (mechanical instability-abnormal displacement form structural damage). Additionally, the study seeks to provide biomechanical insights into the observed differences between subjective and objective assessments. Methods: 35 healthy volunteers and 27 patients with isolated PCLD (both involved and uninvolved sides) were included in the study. All participants walked on a treadmill at a self-selected comfortable speed. An optical 3D motion capture system was employed to collect six degrees of freedom kinematic data of the knee joint during walking. Statistical Parametric Mapping (SPM) was employed, using independent and paired t-tests to evaluate differences between the healthy control group and the PCLD group, as well as between the involved and uninvolved sides, respectively. Results: Compared with the healthy control group, posterior tibial displacement (the main indicator for anterior-posterior instability) of the involved limb was significantly decreased during 79%-94%. additionally, knee flexion angles of the involved limb were significantly increased compared with healthy control group during 0%-5% and 95%-99% of the gait cycle and significantly decreased during 66%-87%; In the uninvolved side, adaptive gait changes were observed, with knee flexion angles significantly reduced during 20%-50% and 64%-89% of the gait cycle and posterior tibial displacement significantly reduced during 60%-94% compared with the healthy control group; Compared to the uninvolved limb, the involved limb showed increased internal rotation during 62%-71% of the gait cycle and increased knee flexion during 8%-53%, with no significant differences in other dimensions. Conclusion: From a biomechanical perspective, patients with PCL rupture exhibit no joint instability during walking. Compared to the healthy control group, the involved leg shows a significant reduction in posterior tibial displacement and a diminished range of knee flexion. Clinical evaluations of PCLD should incorporate dynamic functional assessments, thereby providing a more comprehensive basis for treatment decisions.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.