Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy

, Volume 23, Issue 10, pp 3070–3076 | Cite as

Quantification of functional brace forces for posterior cruciate ligament injuries on the knee joint: an in vivo investigation

  • Robert F. LaPrade
  • Sean D. Smith
  • Katharine J. Wilson
  • Coen A. Wijdicks



Counteracting posterior translation of the tibia with an anterior force on the posterior proximal tibia has been demonstrated clinically to improve posterior knee laxity following posterior cruciate ligament (PCL) injury. This study quantified forces applied to the posterior proximal tibia by two knee braces designed for treatment of PCL injuries.


The forces applied by two knee braces to the posterior proximal tibia and in vivo three-dimensional knee kinematics of six adult, male, healthy volunteer subjects (mean ± standard deviation: height, 182.5 ± 5.2 cm; body mass, 83.2 ± 9.3 kg; body mass index, 24.9 ± 1.5 kg/m2; age, 25.8 ± 2.9 years) were measured using a custom pressure mapping technique and traditional surface marker motion capture techniques, while subjects performed three functional activities. The activities included seated unloaded knee flexion, squatting, and stair descent in a new generation dynamic force (DF) PCL brace and a static force (SF) PCL brace.


During unloaded flexion at the lowest force level setting, the force applied by the DF brace increased as a function of flexion angle (slope = 0.7 N/°; p < 0.001) compared to the SF brace effect. Force applied by the SF brace did not significantly change as a function of flexion angle (slope = 0.0 N/°; n.s.). By 45° of flexion, the average force applied by the DF brace (48.1 N) was significantly larger (p < 0.001) than the average force applied by the SF brace (25.0 N). The difference in force continued to increase as flexion angle increased. During stair descent, average force (mean ± standard deviation) at toe off was significantly higher (p = 0.013) for the DF brace (78.7 ± 21.6 N) than the SF brace (37.3 ± 7.2 N). Similar trends were observed for squatting and for the higher force level settings.


The DF brace applied forces to the posterior proximal tibia that dynamically increased with increased flexion angle. Additionally, the DF brace applied significantly larger forces at higher flexion angles compared to the SF brace where the PCL is known to experience larger in situ forces. Clinical studies are necessary to determine whether the loading characteristics of the DF brace, which more closely replicated the in situ loading profile of the native PCL, results in long-term improved posterior knee laxity following PCL injury.

Level of evidence



Posterior cruciate ligament injury Posterior tibial translation PCL brace Functional brace Lower extremity biomechanics 



The authors acknowledge Kyle Jansson for his contributions to technology development and planning and design of this study. The authors acknowledge Grant Dornan, MSc for his contributions to the statistical analysis in this study and Angelica Wedell for the photography presented in this study.

Conflict of interest

Össur provided unrestricted in-kind donations of the braces utilized in this study. Dr. LaPrade is a consultant for Arthrex and Smith & Nephew.


  1. 1.
    Ahn JH, Lee SH, Choi SH, Wang JH, Jang SW (2011) Evaluation of clinical and magnetic resonance imaging results after treatment with casting and bracing for the acutely injured posterior cruciate ligament. Arthroscopy 27:1679–1687CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Anderson CJ, Ziegler CG, Wijdicks CA, Engebretsen L, LaPrade RF (2012) Arthroscopically pertinent anatomy of the anterolateral and posteromedial bundles of the posterior cruciate ligament. J Bone Jt Surg Am 94:1936–1945CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Clancy WG Jr, Shelbourne KD, Zoellner GB, Keene JS, Reider B, Rosenberg TD (1983) Treatment of knee joint instability secondary to rupture of the posterior cruciate ligament: report of a new procedure. J Bone Jt Surg Am 65:310–322Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Covey CD, Sapega AA (1993) Injuries of the posterior cruciate ligament. J Bone Jt Surg Am 75:1376–1386Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    DeFrate LE, Gill TJ, Li G (2004) In vivo function of the posterior cruciate ligament during weightbearing knee flexion. Am J Sports Med 32:1923–1928CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Escamilla RF, Zheng N, MacLeod TD, Imamura R, Edwards WB, Hreljac A, Fleisig GS, Wilk KE, Moorman CT, Paulos L, Andrews JR (2010) Cruciate ligament tensile forces during the forward and side lunge. Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon) 25:213–221CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Fanelli GC (1993) Posterior cruciate ligament injuries in trauma patients. Arthroscopy 9:291–294CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Fanelli GC, Edson CJ (1995) Posterior cruciate ligament injuries in trauma patients: part II. Arthroscopy 11:526–529CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Fowler PJ, Messieh SS (1987) Isolated posterior cruciate ligament injuries in athletes. Am J Sports Med 15:553–557CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Fox RJ, Harner CD, Sakane M, Carlin GJ, Woo SL (1998) Determination of the in situ forces in the human posterior cruciate ligament using robotic technology: a cadaveric study. Am J Sports Med 26:395–401CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Harner CD, Janaushek MA, Kanamori A, Yagi M, Vogrin TM, Woo SL (2000) Biomechanical analysis of a double-bundle posterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Am J Sports Med 28:144–151PubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Iwata S, Suda Y, Nagura T, Matsumoto H, Otani T, Toyama Y (2007) Dynamic instability during stair descent in isolated PCL-deficient knees: what affects abnormal posterior translation of the tibia in PCL-deficient knees? Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 15:705–711CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Jacobi M, Reischl N, Wahl P, Gautier E, Jakob RP (2010) Acute isolated injury of the posterior cruciate ligament treated by dynamic anterior drawer brace: a preliminary report. J Bone Jt Surg Br 92:1381–1384CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Jansson KS, Costello KE, O’Brien L, Wijdicks CA, Laprade RF (2013) A historical perspective of PCL bracing. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 21:1064–1070CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Jung YB, Tae SK, Lee YS, Jung HJ, Nam CH, Park SJ (2007) Active non-operative treatment of acute isolated posterior cruciate ligament injury with cylinder cast immobilization. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 16:729–733CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Keller PM, Shelbourne KD, McCarroll JR, Rettig AC (1993) Nonoperatively treated isolated posterior cruciate ligament injuries. Am J Sports Med 21:132–136CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Kennedy NI, Laprade RF, Goldsmith MT, Faucett SC, Rasmussen MT, Coatney GA, Engebretsen L, Wijdicks CA (2014) Posterior cruciate ligament graft fixation angles, part 1: biomechanical evaluation of anatomic single-bundle reconstruction. Am J Sports Med. doi: 10.1177/0363546514541225 Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Kennedy NI, Wijdicks CA, Goldsmith MT, Michalski MP, Devitt BM, Aroen A, Engebretsen L, LaPrade RF (2013) Kinematic analysis of the posterior cruciate ligament, part 1: the individual and collective function of the anterolateral and posteromedial bundles. Am J Sports Med 41:2828–2838CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Li G, DeFrate LE, Sun H, Gill TJ (2004) In vivo elongation of the anterior cruciate ligament and posterior cruciate ligament during knee flexion. Am J Sports Med 32:1415–1420CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Lopez-Vidriero E, David SA, Johnson DH (2010) Initial evaluation of posterior cruciate ligament injuries: history, physical examination, imaging studies, surgical and nonsurgical indications. Sports Med Arthrosc 18:230–237CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Myers CA, Torry MR, Shelburne KB, Giphart JE, LaPrade RF, Woo SL, Steadman JR (2012) In vivo tibiofemoral kinematics during 4 functional tasks of increasing demand using biplane fluoroscopy. Am J Sports Med 40:170–178CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Papannagari R, DeFrate LE, Nha KW, Moses JM, Moussa M, Gill TJ, Li G (2007) Function of posterior cruciate ligament bundles during in vivo knee flexion. Am J Sports Med 35:1507–1512CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Parolie JM, Bergfeld JA (1986) Long-term results of nonoperative treatment of isolated posterior cruciate ligament injuries in the athlete. Am J Sports Med 14:35–38CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Shelbourne KD, Davis TJ, Patel DV (1999) The natural history of acute, isolated, nonoperatively treated posterior cruciate ligament injuries: a prospective study. Am J Sports Med 27:276–283PubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Spiridonov SI, Slinkard NJ, LaPrade RF (2011) Isolated and combined grade-III posterior cruciate ligament tears treated with double-bundle reconstruction with use of endoscopically placed femoral tunnels and grafts: operative technique and clinical outcomes. J Bone Jt Surg Am 93:1773–1780CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Strobel MJ, Weiler A, Schulz MS, Russe K, Eichhorn HJ (2002) Fixed posterior subluxation in posterior cruciate ligament-deficient knees: diagnosis and treatment of a new clinical sign. Am J Sports Med 30:32–38PubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Wijdicks CA, Kennedy NI, Goldsmith MT, Devitt BM, Michalski MP, Aroen A, Engebretsen L, LaPrade RF (2013) Kinematic analysis of the posterior cruciate ligament, part 2: a comparison of anatomic single- versus double-bundle reconstruction. Am J Sports Med 41:2839–2848CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Yoon KH, Park SW, Lee SH, Kim MH, Park SY, Oh H (2013) Does cast immobilization contribute to posterior stability after posterior cruciate ligament reconstruction? Arthroscopy 29:500–506CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© European Society of Sports Traumatology, Knee Surgery, Arthroscopy (ESSKA) 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Robert F. LaPrade
    • 1
    • 2
  • Sean D. Smith
    • 1
  • Katharine J. Wilson
    • 1
  • Coen A. Wijdicks
    • 1
  1. 1.Steadman Philippon Research InstituteVailUSA
  2. 2.The Steadman ClinicVailUSA

Personalised recommendations