Litcius/Paper detail

A Randomized Controlled Trial of Eccentric Versus Concentric Cycling for Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction Rehabilitation

Giovanni Milandri, Sudesh Sivarasu

2021The American Journal of Sports Medicine20 citationsDOI

Abstract

Background: Persistent strength and biomechanical deviations remain after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR). Eccentric training may reduce these and associated reinjury or osteoarthritis risks. Hypothesis: For male patients who have undergone ACLR, eccentric training is more effective than concentric training at improving knee flexion angle and other biomechanical deviations, as well as strength and patient-reported outcomes, using a matched perceived exertion dose. Study Design: Randomized controlled trial; Level of evidence, 1. Methods: A total of 26 men, 10-16 weeks after hamstring tendon graft ACLR, were randomized to an eccentric training group or a concentric control group. Both groups trained 3 times a week for 8 weeks using the same isokinetic cycle ergometer in a matched studio environment. Exercise dose was matched in training frequency, time, progression, and intensity using a target rating of perceived exertion. Baseline and follow-up testing included questionnaires, dynamometer strength testing, and walk/run gait analysis. Results: Eccentric training increased knee (+2.1°; P = .022) and hip (+2.1°; P = .010) flexion angles more than concentric training but not more than the minimal clinically important difference of 3°. Very large asymmetries in baseline knee abduction moment (walk, −0.10 N·m/kg/m; run, −0.54 N·m/kg/m) had not changed in either group by follow-up. Knee valgus angle effects were mixed. Tibial rotation angle increased in both groups, but concentric training was more effective at promoting symmetry ( P < .001). Both groups had similar increases in affected limb quadriceps strength and knee flexion moments during walk/run gait (by 20% to 33%). Hamstring strength increased in the eccentric group (+15.4%) but not the concentric group. Eccentric group limb forces were 33% to 70% higher than those of the concentric group, with a lower heart rate. Both groups had low pain scores throughout. Conclusion: For rehabilitation after ACLR, progressive eccentric cycle training was not more clinically effective than concentric training at a matched perceived intensity dose in male patients. This can guide exercise prescription for reducing gait and strength deviations of these patients. Registration: PACTR201602001449365 (Pan African Clinical Trials Registry), NHREC 4344 (South African).

Topics & Concepts

Anterior cruciate ligament reconstructionEccentricConcentricMedicineEccentric trainingRandomized controlled trialHamstringPhysical therapyAnterior cruciate ligamentPhysical medicine and rehabilitationRehabilitationRating of perceived exertionSurgeryMathematicsBlood pressureRadiologyQuantum mechanicsPhysicsHeart rateGeometryKnee injuries and reconstruction techniquesLower Extremity Biomechanics and PathologiesTendon Structure and Treatment
A Randomized Controlled Trial of Eccentric Versus Concentric Cycling for Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction Rehabilitation | Litcius