REF-1666 · Fleming et al., 1998 · The American Journal of Sports Medicine, · Paper · PubMed

Stationary cycling strained the ACL little in 8 knee patients measured in vivo: peak strain ranged from 1.2% (175 W, 90 rpm) to 2.1% (125 W, 60 rpm) across six power and cadence conditions, neither power (75-175 W) nor cadence (60-90 rpm) changed it significantly, and the pooled mean peak of 1.7% was relatively low against other rehabilitation activities tested before

Main caveat: 8 participants; their own ligaments, not grafts; seated riding at 75-175 W and 60-90 rpm only.
limited, mixed evidenceMeasured on a mixed groupRead from the abstract only

Stationary cycling is often prescribed after ACL injury or reconstruction, but the strain it places on the ligament or on a graft had not been measured. Fleming and colleagues measured ACL strain in vivo in eight patients who were candidates for arthroscopic meniscectomy, under local anaesthesia, while they rode in six conditions: 75, 125 and 175 W, each at 60 and at 90 rpm.

Peak strain ranged from 1.2% at 175 W and 90 rpm to 2.1% at 125 W and 60 rpm. Neither power nor cadence changed peak strain significantly, so the values were pooled across the six conditions: the mean peak strain was 1.7%, which the authors call relatively low against other rehabilitation activities tested earlier.

They conclude that rehabilitation programmes can use this range of power and cadence without significantly changing ligament strain, and that a rider can raise muscle activity with more power or a lower cadence without putting more strain on the ligament or graft.

Participants

n = 8 patients who were candidates for arthroscopic meniscectomy. Both sexes, adult to middle-aged, by the PubMed indexing (the abstract states neither). The abstract does not describe the state of their ligaments; since they were meniscectomy candidates rather than ACL patients, their own ligaments were measured, not grafts (our reading).

Protocol

In vivo ACL strain measured during stationary cycling, under local anaesthesia, in candidates for arthroscopic meniscectomy.
Six conditions per participant: 75, 125 and 175 W, each at 60 and 90 rpm.
Outcome: peak ligament strain in each condition; values pooled when power and cadence showed no significant effect.
Not in the abstract: how strain was measured, the bike set-up (saddle height, crank length), the order of conditions, and the values for the other four conditions.

Key Results

ConditionPeak ACL strain
Lowest: 175 W, 90 rpm1.2%
Highest: 125 W, 60 rpm2.1%
Mean peak, pooled across all six conditions1.7%
Power level and cadence: no significant differences in peak strain.
Against other rehabilitation activities: "relatively low" in the authors' words; the values for those activities are not in the abstract.

Practical Application

An indoor bike at 75-175 W and 60-90 rpm put little strain on the ACL, and neither power nor cadence in that range changed it significantly. That is consistent with the common prescription of stationary cycling after an ACL injury or reconstruction, though it was measured on patients' own ligaments, not grafts or early after surgery; the surgeon and physiotherapist decide when riding starts, the knee range it needs and its limits, and the assistant does not set them.
Within that range, harder or slower pedalling did not cost the ligament more. The authors read this as room to raise muscle work with more power or a lower cadence at no extra ligament strain. Inference, not tested here: power and cadence targets in a rehabilitation ride follow the physiotherapist and the knee's comfort, not a ligament rule.
Inference, not tested here: the measurements were on the patients' own ligaments, seated; a graft early after surgery, standing or sprinting, and powers above 175 W were not measured.
Refer-out. Pain, swelling or the knee giving way on the bike go back to the physiotherapist or surgeon; the assistant does not diagnose.
Not settled by this design / not from this paper: whether cycling during rehabilitation changes outcomes (no outcome was measured), the strain on a graft, and how cycling compares in numbers with other exercises (not in the abstract).

Limitations

8 participants; their own ligaments, not grafts; seated riding at 75-175 W and 60-90 rpm only.
Measured under local anaesthesia in a surgical setting; whether that changed muscle activity or strain is not discussed in the abstract.
Mechanics only: no clinical outcome, and the comparison with other exercises is described, not quantified, in the abstract.
A study from 1998; the strain-measurement method is not described in the abstract.
No significant difference in a sample of 8 cannot show that power or cadence has no effect.
Written from the abstract and the PubMed record; full text not read.
How this entry was checked and changed
Why this level

(from the abstract) — a within-subject laboratory study of 8 is B design (below the 15 that the rubric asks of a crossover for B+), lowered one step as an abstract-only small study with key methods missing (how strain was measured, the order of conditions, the statistics); ligament strain measured directly in vivo is mechanics, not a marker (rule 3), and it is the outcome this entry is about

Content correction 2026-11-07
2026-11-07: added from the abstract and the PubMed record; level B- (within-subject laboratory study, n = 8, abstract only with key methods missing; directly measured ligament strain).