These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Are re-injured ligaments equivalent mechanically to injured ligaments: The role of re-injury severity?
    Author: Sevick JL, Heard BJ, Lo IK, Randle JA, Frank CB, Shrive NG, Thornton GM.
    Journal: Proc Inst Mech Eng H; 2018 Jul; 232(7):665-672. PubMed ID: 29962325.
    Abstract:
    The consequences of ligament re-injury have received limited attention. Although the mechanical properties of injured ligaments improve over time, these properties are never fully recaptured, rendering these injured ligaments susceptible to re-injury. Previous injury is a significant risk factor for recurrent injury, and this re-injury can result in longer absence from activity than the initial injury. A rabbit medial collateral ligament model was used to compare mechanically re-injured right medial collateral ligaments to injured left medial collateral ligaments. Two groups of different re-injury severity were investigated: 'minor' re-injury comparing transection re-injured right medial collateral ligaments to transection injured left medial collateral ligaments; 'major' re-injury comparing gap re-injured right medial collateral ligaments to transection injured left medial collateral ligaments. Initial injuries for both groups were right medial collateral ligament transections 1 week before re-injury. After 5-6 weeks of healing, mechanical testing was performed to determine (dimensionally) cross-sectional area; (structurally) medial collateral ligament laxity, failure load, and stiffness; and (materially) cyclic creep strain and failure stress. Because we wanted to evaluate whether the mechanical properties of re-injured ligaments were equivalent or, at least, no worse than injured ligaments, we used equivalence/noninferiority testing. This approach evaluates a research hypothesis of equivalence, rather than difference, and determines whether comparisons are 'statistically equivalent', 'noninferior', or 'potentially inferior'. Transection re-injured and gap re-injured ligaments were 'statistically equivalent' structurally to transection injured ligaments. Transection re-injured ligaments were 'noninferior' both materially and dimensionally to transection injured ligaments. Gap re-injured ligaments were 'potentially inferior' both materially and dimensionally to transection injured ligaments. Two differences between the re-injuries, which affect healing, may explain the mechanical outcomes: the presence or lack of healing products and the proximity of ligament ends at the time of re-injury. Our findings suggest that (in the short term) there is a severity of re-injury below which there is no additional disadvantage to the healing process, mechanical behaviour, and resulting potential for re-injury.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]