Background:Knee positions involved in noncontact anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injury
have been studied via analysis of injury videos. Positions of high ACL
strain have been identified in vivo. These methods have supported different
hypotheses regarding the role of knee abduction in ACL injury.Purpose/Hypothesis:The purpose of this study was to compare knee abduction angles measured by 2
methods: using a 3-dimensional (3D) coordinate system based on anatomic
features of the bones versus simulated 2-dimensional (2D) videographic
analysis. We hypothesized that knee abduction angles measured in a 2D
videographic analysis would differ from those measured from 3D bone anatomic
features and that videographic knee abduction angles would depend on flexion
angle and on the position of the camera relative to the patient.Study Design:Descriptive laboratory study.Methods:Models of the femur and tibia were created from magnetic resonance images of
8 healthy male participants. The models were positioned to match biplanar
fluoroscopic images obtained as participants posed in lunges of varying
flexion angles (FLAs). Knee abduction angle was calculated from the
positioned models in 2 ways: (1) varus-valgus angle (VVA), defined as the
angle between the long axis of the tibia and the femoral transepicondylar
axis by use of a 3D anatomic coordinate system; and (2) coronal plane angle
(CPA), defined as the angle between the long axis of the tibia and the long
axis of the femur projected onto the tibial coronal plane to simulate a 2D
videographic analysis. We then simulated how changing the position of the
camera relative to the participant would affect knee abduction angles.Results:During flexion, when CPA was calculated from a purely anterior or posterior
view of the joint—an ideal scenario for measuring knee abduction from 2D
videographic analysis—CPA was significantly different from VVA
(P < .0001). CPA also varied substantially with the
position of the camera relative to the participant.Conclusion:How closely CPA (derived from 2D videographic analysis) relates to VVA
(derived from a 3D anatomic coordinate system) depends on FLA and camera
orientation.Clinical Relevance:This study provides a novel comparison of knee abduction angles measured from
2D videographic analysis and those measured within a 3D anatomic coordinate
system. Consideration of these findings is important when interpreting 2D
videographic data regarding knee abduction angle in ACL injury.