Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Objective evaluation of anterior knee laxity; comparison of the KT-1000 and GNRB® arthrometers

  • Knee
  • Published:
Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy Aims and scope

Abstract

Purpose

Accurate measurement of laxity after anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) rupture is usually performed with the KT-1000 arthrometer, and reproducibility and reliability are discussed. A new arthrometer, the GNRB®, has been recently developed in an attempt to improve intra- and inter-examiner reproducibility. The aim of this diagnostic study was to evaluate the intra- and inter-examiner reproducibility of the GNRB® and the KT-1000.

Methods

Three protocols were designed to evaluate and compare the two arthrometers. Fifteen physiotherapists conducted tests on 15 subjects with healthy knees. The intra- and inter-reproducibility of the two tests were compared by analysis of variance and the F-test.

Results

Measure reproducibility was significantly worst with the KT-1000 than with the GNRB® (machine effect, P < 0.001) regardless of operator experience. There was no significant difference between experienced and inexperienced examiners with the GNRB® (no ‘examiners effect’). Regardless of the machine, there was a ‘side effect’ with healthy knees.

Conclusion

This clinical study demonstrates the superior intra- and inter-examiner reproducibility of the GNRB® over the KT-1000. There appears to be some technological advantages to using the GNRB® including pressure control of the patella, accuracy of the displacement transducer, control of the load on the calf, and control of hamstring activity.

Level of evidence

Diagnostic study, Level I.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Ahlden M, Kartus J, Ejerhed L, Karlsson J, Sernert N (2009) Knee laxity measurements after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction, using either bone-patellartendon-bone or hamstring tendon autografts, with special emphasis on comparison over time. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 17:1117–1124

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Anderson AF, Lipscomb AB (1989) Preoperative instrumented testing of the anterior and posterior knee laxity. Am J Sports Med 17:387–392

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Anderson AF, Synder RB, Federspiel CF, Lipscomb AB (1992) Instrumented evaluation of knee laxity: a comparison of five arthrometer. Am J Sports Med 20:135–140

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Ballantyne BT, French AK, Helmsoth SL, Kachingwe AF, Soderberg G (1995) Influence of examiner and gender on interrater reliability of KT-1000 arthrometer measurements. Phys Ther 75:898–906

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Benvenuti JF, Valloton JA, Meystre JL, Leyvraz PF (1998) Objective assessment of the anterior tibial translation in Lachman test position. Comparison between three types of measurement. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 6:215–219

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Berry J, Kramer K, Binkley GA, Stratford P, Hunter S, Brown K (1999) Error estimate in novices and expert raters for the KT-1000 arthrometer. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 29:49–55

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Boyer P, Djian P, Christel P, Paoletti X, Degeorges R (2004) Fiabilité de l’arthromètre KT-1000 pour la mesure de la laxité antérieure du genou. Rev Chir Ortho 90:757–764

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Branch TB, Mayr HO, Browne JE, Campbell JC, Stoehr A, Jacobs CA (2010) Instrumented examination of anterior cruciate ligament injuries: minimizing flaws of the manual clinical examination. Arthroscopy 7:997–1004

    Google Scholar 

  9. Daniel DM, Malcom LL, Losse G, Stone ML, Sachs R, Burks R (1985) Instrumented measurement of anterior laxity of the knee. J Bone Joint Surg 67 A:720–726

    Google Scholar 

  10. Daniel DM, Stone ML, Sachs R, Malcolm M (1985) Instrumented measurement of anterior knee in patient with acute anterior cruciate ligament disruption. Am J Sports Med 13:401–407

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. DeFranco MJ, Bach BR (2009) A comprehensive review of partial anterior cruciate ligament tears. J Bone Joint Surg 91:198–208

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Guillodo Y, Rannou N, Dubrana F, Lefèvre C, Saraux A (2008) Diagnostic of ACL rupture in an emergency department. J Trauma 65:1078–1082

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Guskiewitcz KM, Perrin DH, Martin DE, Kahler DM, Gansneder BM, McCue FC (1995) Effects OF ACL reconstruction and tibial rotation on anterior knee laxity. Athl Training 30:243246

    Google Scholar 

  14. Hanten WP, Pace MB (1987) Reliability of measuring anterior laxity of the knee using knee ligament arthrometer. Phys Ther 67:357–359

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Highgenboten CL, Jackson A, Meske NB (1989) Genucom, KT-1000 and Stryker knee laxity measuring device comparison in asymptomatic subjects. Am J Sports Med 17:743–746

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Holt MD, Fairclough JA (1995) The KT-1000: is it accurate? Knee 2:59–63

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Hyder N, Bollen SR, Sefton G, Swann AC (1997) Correlation between arthrometric evaluation of knees using KT-1000 and telos stress radiography and functional outcome following ACL reconstruction. Knee 4:121–124

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Isberg J, Faxen E, Brandsson S, Eriksson B, Karrholm J, Karlsson J (2006) KT-1000 records smaller side to side differences than RSA before and after ACL reconstruction. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 14:529–535

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Jardin C, Chantelot C, Migaud H, Gougeon F, Debroucker MJ, Duquennoy A (1999) Fiabilité de l’arthromètre KT-1000 pour la mesure de la laxité antérieure du genou: analyse comparitive avec le Télos. Rev Chir Orthop 85:698–707

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Khan R, Konives A, Rama BS, Thomas R, Amis AA (2006) RSA can measure ACL graft stretching and migration. Clin Orthop 448:139–145

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Lerat JL, Moyen B, Cladiere F, Besse JL, Adibi H (2000) Knee instability after injury of the ACL. Quantification of the Lachman test. J Bone Joint Surg 82-B:42–47

    Google Scholar 

  22. Lubowitz JH, Bernardini BJ, Reid JB (2008) Comprehensive physical examination for instability of the knee. Am J Sports Med 36:577–594

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Mayr H, Hoell A, Berstein A, Hube R, Zeiler C, Kalteis T, Suedkamp NP, Stoehr A (2011) Validation of a measurement device for instrumented quantification of anterior translation and rotational assessment of the knee. Arthroscopy 27:1096–1104

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Myrer JW, Schulthies SS, Fellingham GW (1996) Relative and absolute reliability of the KT-2000 arthrometer for uninjured knees. Am J Sports Med 24:104–108

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Pugh L, Mascarenhas R, Arneja S, Chin PYK, Leith JM (2009) Current concepts in instrumented Knee-laxity testing. Am J Sports Med 37:199–210

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Robert H, Nouveau S, Gageot S, Gagnère B (2009) A new knee arthrometer, the GNRB®: experience in ACL complete and partial tears. Ortho Traumatol Surg Res 95:171–176

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Schuster AJ, McNicholas MJ, Wachtl SW, McGurty DW, Jacob RP (2004) A new mechanical testing device for measuring anteroposterior knee laxity. Am J Sports Med 32:1731–1735

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Sernert N, Kartus J, Kohler K, Ejerhed L, Karlsson J (2001) Evaluation of the reproducibility of the KT-1000 arthrometer. Scand J Med Sci Sport 11:120–125

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  29. Un BS, Beynnon BD, Churchill DL, Haugh LD, Risberg MA, Fleming BC (2001) A new device to measure knee laxity during weight bearing and non weight bearing conditions. J Orthop Res 19:1185–1191

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Wiertsema SH, Van Hooff HJA, Migchelsen LAA, Steultjens MPM (2008) Reliability of the KT-1000 arthrometer and the Lachman test in patients with ACL rupture. Knee 15:107–110

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  31. Wrobble RR, Van Ginkel LA, Grood ES, Noyes FR (1990) Repeatability of the KT-1000 arthrometer in normal population. Am J Sports Med 18:396–399

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Conflict of interest

The authors have no potential conflict of interest.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Orthopaedic Department, Clinique Edith Cavell, 32 rue Edith Cavell, 1180, Brussels, Belgium

    Michel Collette

  2. Physiotherapy Department, Clinique Edith Cavell, 32 rue Edith Cavell, 1180, Brussels, Belgium

    Julie Courville & Marc Forton

  3. Institute of Sanitary Engineering, 35042, Rennes, France

    Bertrand Gagnière

Authors
  1. Michel Collette
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Julie Courville
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Marc Forton
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Bertrand Gagnière
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Michel Collette.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Collette, M., Courville, J., Forton, M. et al. Objective evaluation of anterior knee laxity; comparison of the KT-1000 and GNRB® arthrometers. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 20, 2233–2238 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00167-011-1869-2

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00167-011-1869-2

Keywords

Search

Navigation