人工韌帶現今已經被普遍使用在臨床的前十字韌帶重建術上，然而目前人工韌帶在經過預扭角度後所做的力學性質評估相當有限。本研究使用LARS人工韌帶進行拉伸破壞測試來評估其在不同扭轉角度下的力學性質，用逼近的方式找出最大極限抗拉強度所對應的扭轉角度，並分析其它力學參數，選擇的扭轉角度有0度、130度、230度、275度、300度、320度以及390度共7組。
研究結果顯示，LARS人工韌帶在扭轉角275度~320度之間有較高的極限抗拉強度，其極限強度值約為扭轉角0度時的1.75倍，其他如極限應變、破壞能以及扭力等性質也都有較高的趨勢，然而，在日常生活工作強度500牛頓範圍內的勁度值則偏低，與人工韌帶在扭轉角130度所呈現的最大值相差約兩倍。本研究並經由拍攝所有試件從拉伸至破壞的過程，發現扭轉角度的不同，人工韌帶破壞的方式也會有所差異。

The artificial ligament is commonly used in clinical cruciate ligament reconstruction. However, the investigations of the mechanical properties of the artificial cruciate ligament at pre-twisted angles are still limited. This study evaluated the mechanical properties between different pre-twisted angles of LARS artificial cruciate ligament by tensile failure test. We used the approach method to find out the corresponding pre-twisted angle in the highest ultimate tensile strength of the artificial ligament, and analyzed related mechanical parameters. The chosen pre-twisted angles in the study were 0, 130, 230, 275, 300, 320 and 390 degrees, respectively.
The results showed that the corresponding pre-twisted angle in the highest ultimate tensile strength of the LARS artificial ligament were between 275 to 320 degrees, and it’s about 1.75 times of the ultimate tensile strength at 0 degree. The other parameters such as ultimate strain, failure energy and torque also had a tendency to be higher between 275 to 320 degrees than the other angles. However, the stiffness at the range of daily work forces was showed relatively lower values between 275 to 320 degrees. In this study, we also recorded the processes of the tensile failure test of all the specimens by camera. From this, there were different failure conditions of the specimens with different pre-twisted angles.

1. Arciero RA. Endoscopic anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: complication of graft rupture and a method of salvage. Am J Knee Surg. 1996 ; 9(1): 27-31.
2. Boni DM, Herriott GE. Hamstring tendon graft for anterior cruiate ligament reconstruction. AORN J. 2002 ; 76(4): 610-628. Review.
3. Boynton MD, Fadale PD. The basic science of anterior cruciate ligament surgery. Orthop Rev. 1993 ; 22(6): 673-9. Review
4. Barrett GR et al. The Dacron ligament prosthesis in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. A four-year review. Am J Sports Med, 1993 ; 21(3): 367-73.
5. Gillquist J, Odensten M: Reconstruction of old anterior cruciate ligament tears with a Dacron prosthesis, Am J Sports Med, 1993 ; 21(3) : 358-66.
6. Wredmark T, Engstrom B. Five-year results of anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction with the Stryker Dacron high-strength ligament. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 1993 ; 1(2): 71-5.
7. Lukianov AV, Richmond JC, Barrett GR, Gillquist J. A multicenter study on the results of anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction using a Dacron ligament prosthesis in “salvage” cases. Am J Sports Med. 1989 ; 17(3): 380-5 ; discussion 385-6.
8. Tabrizaian M, Leroy-Gallisot, Yahia LH. Evaluation of cruciate ligament prosthetic LARS knee ligament. LARS company report, 1996.
9. Yahia LH et al. Evaluation of cruciate ligament prostheses: criticism of the current concepts and procedures. LARS company report, 1996.
10. Fowler PJ. The classification and early diagnosis of knee joint instability. Clin Orthop. 1980 ; (147): 15-21.
11. Marshall JL, Girgis FG, Zelko RR. The biceps femoris tendon and its functional significance. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1972 ; 54(7): 1444-50.
12. Southmayd W, Quigley TB. The forgotten popliteus muscle. Its usefulness in correction of anteromedial rotatory instability of the knee. A preliminary report. Clin Orthop. 1978 ; (130): 218-22
13. Calliet R. Knee pain and disability, 3rd ed. Philadelphia: F.A. Davis company ; 1992.
14. Engle RP. Knee ligament rehabilitation. New York, NY: Churchill Livingstone ; 1991.
15. Tria AJ. Ligaments of the knee. New York, NY: Churchill Livingstone ; 1995.
16. Noyes FR et al. The symptomatic anterior cruciate-deficient knee. Part I: the long-term functional disability in athletically active individuals. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1983 ; 65(2): 154-62.
17. King S et al. The anterior cruciate ligament: A review of recent concepts. J Orthop Sports Physical Ther. 1986 ; 8: 110.
18. Christina RA, Glen AL, Eric KW, Savio LW. Injury and reconstruction of the anterior cruciate ligament and knee osteoarthritis. Osteoarthritis and Cartilage. Res. 1999 ; 7: 110-121.
19. Noyes FR, Grood ES. Strength of the Anterior Cruciate Ligament in Humans and Rhesus Monkey. J. Bone Joint Surg. (Am). 1976 ; 58: 1074-82.
20. Chen EH, Black J. Materials desigh analysis of the prosthetic anterior cruciate ligament. J. Biomed. Mater. Res. 1980 ; 14: 567-586.
21. Lavoie P, Fletcher J, Duval N. Patient satifaction needs as related to knee stability and objective findings after ACL reconstruction using the LARS artificial ligament. Knee. 2000 Jul 1 ; 7(3): 157-163.
22. Nau T, Lavoie P, Duval N. A new generation of artificial ligaments in reconstruction of the anterior cruciate ligament. Two-year follow-up of a randomized trial. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2002 Apr ; 84(3): 356-60.
23. Maryam T, Aude LG, L’Hocine Y. Evaluation of synthetic LARS knee ligaments. Ligaments and Ligamentoplasties. 1996.
24. Paul NS, Kathryn MR, Jennifer MS. Development of the concepts of knee kinematics. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation. 2003 ; 84(6): 1897.
25. Elaine NM, Jon M. Human Anatomy. 3rd edition, addsion Wesley Longman, New York. 2001; 231-233.