Tibiofemoral bone configuration is not associated with hamstring muscle strength in male and female patients with ACL reconstruction

Abstract

AbstractPurposePrevious evidence indicated that the tibiofemoral bone configuration might elevate the risk of an anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injury. Furthermore, a low hamstring‐to‐quadriceps muscle ratio predisposes especially females to unfavourable knee kinematics. The primary objective of the present study was to investigate sex‐specific associations between tibiofemoral bone geometry and isokinetic knee flexion torque in patients with primary ACL injury followed by ACL reconstruction.MethodsN = 100 patients (72 = male, 28 = female, age = 31.3 ± 10.2, body mass index = 25.3 ± 3.6) with primary ACL rupture with isokinetic knee flexion torque assessments before and 6 months after ACL reconstruction surgery were analysed. Magnetic resonance imaging scans were analysed for medial posterior tibial slope (MPTS) and lateral posterior tibial slope, notch width index (NWI) and lateral femoral condyle index (LFCI). Additionally, isokinetic knee flexion torque (60°/s) and hamstring–quadriceps ratios were evaluated. Subsequently, functional parameters were correlated with imaging data for gender subgroups.ResultsThe findings showed that presurgical isokinetic knee flexion torque was not associated with any marker of femoral or tibial bone geometry. Further, while significant differences were observed between female (0.883 ± 0.31 Nm/kg) and male (1.18 ± 0.35 Nm/kg) patients regarding preoperative normalized knee flexion torque (p < 0.001), no significant sex differences were found for percentage increases in normalized knee flexion torque from presurgery to postsurgery. Generally, female patients demonstrated significantly higher MPTS magnitudes (p < 0.05) and lower LFCI values (p < 0.05) compared to men.ConclusionThe present results demonstrated no association between tibial or femoral bone geometry and muscle strength of the hamstrings in patients with ACL reconstruction, indicating an important mismatch of muscular compensation to deviations in bone geometry. There were no sex‐specific differences in tibiofemoral bone parameters.Level of EvidenceLevel III.