Proprioception in patients with posterior cruciate ligament tears: A meta-analysis comparison of reconstructed and contralateral normal knees

Posterior cruciate ligament (PCL) reconstruction for patients with PCL insufficiency has been associated with postoperative improvements in proprioceptive function due to mechanoreceptor regeneration. However, it is unclear whether reconstructed PCL or contralateral normal knees have better proprioceptive function outcomes. This meta-analysis was designed to compare the proprioceptive function of reconstructed PCL or contralateral normal knees in patients with PCL insufficiency. All studies that compared proprioceptive function, as assessed with threshold to detect passive movement (TTDPM) or joint position sense (JPS) in PCL reconstructed or contralateral normal knees were included. JPS was calculated by reproducing passive positioning (RPP). Five studies met the inclusion/exclusion criteria for the meta-analysis. The proprioceptive function, defined as TTDPM (95% CI: 0.25 to 0.51°; P<0.00001) and RPP (95% CI: 0.19 to 0.45°; P<0.00001), was significantly different between the reconstructed PCL and contralateral normal knees. The mean difference in angle of error between the reconstructed PCL and contralateral normal knees was 0.06° greater in TTDPM than by RPP. In addition, results from subgroup analyses, based on the starting angles and the moving directions of the knee, that evaluated TTDPM at 15° flexion to 45° extension, TTDPM at 45° flexion to 110° flexion, RPP in flexion, and RPP in extension demonstrated that mean angles of error were significantly greater, by 0.38° (P = 0.0001), 0.36° (P = 0.02), 0.36° (P<0.00001), and 0.23° (P = 0.04), respectively, in reconstructed PCL than in contralateral normal knees. The proprioceptive function of PCL reconstructed knees was decreased, compared with contralateral normal knees, as determined by both TTDPM and RPP. In addition, the amount of loss of proprioception was greater in TTDPM than in RPP, even with minute differences. Results from subgroup analysis, that evaluated the mean angles of error in moving directions through RPP, suggested that the moving direction of flexion has a significantly greater mean for angles of error than the moving direction of extension. Although the level of differences between various parameters were statistically significant, further studies are needed to determine whether the small differences (>1°) of the loss of proprioception are clinically relevant.