Instrumented examination of anterior cruciate ligament injuries: minimizing flaws of the manual clinical examination

Abstract

The clinical examination is a basic language of orthopaedics; it is how orthopaedic surgeons communicate with one another. However, each surgeon speaks a different dialect that has been influenced by where and with whom that surgeon trained, as well as that person's own experiences. Because of the inherent variability in the magnitude, direction, and rate of force application during the clinical examination, manual arthrometers were developed in an attempt to more consistently quantify the clinical examination. Instrumented manual devices, such as the KT-1000 (MEDmetric, San Diego, CA), were the first to provide objective numbers to surgeons and researchers evaluating anteroposterior (AP) knee joint laxity. Although these devices provide surgeons with feedback related to the amount of force applied, the rate at which the force is applied is uncontrolled, resulting in a lack of reliability similar to that of the clinical examination itself. In addition to potential errors in measuring AP laxity, rotational laxity has proven to be very difficult to quantify. Robotic systems that make use of computer-driven motors to perform laxity testing have recently been developed to control the magnitude, direction, and rate of force application and thus improve the accuracy and reliability of both AP and rotational laxity evaluation. This review discusses the evolution of instrumented clinical knee examination over the past 3 decades and highlights the advantages and disadvantages of the various testing systems, as well as how current and future developments in this area may improve the field of orthopaedics by minimizing the flaws of the manual clinical examination.