Accuracy of a computer-assisted planning and placement system for anatomical femoral tunnel positioning in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction

Proximally positioned femoral grafts decrease passive anterior tibial subluxation in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction using a posterior trans-septal portal

PURPOSE

To compare the anterior and posterior trans-septal (TS) portal approaches in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) by evaluating femoral tunnel positioning and passive anterior tibial subluxation (PATS).

METHODS

A total of 205 patients who underwent primary ACLR using the outside-in technique between March 2018 and December 2021 were retrospectively enrolled. Patients were classified into two groups based on the viewing techniques: the anterior group was treated using anteromedial or anterolateral portals (n = 155), and the TS group was treated using posterior TS portal (n = 55). The relative locations of the femoral tunnel were evaluated using the deep-shallow planes (X-axis) and superior-inferior planes (Y-axis) with the quadrant method in the lateral femoral condyle on a 3-dimensional computed tomography image. Anterior tibial subluxation for the lateral and medial compartments relative to the femoral condyles was evaluated as measured on magnetic resonance imaging. Knee laxity was assessed using the pivot-shift test and stress radiography.

RESULTS

In the posterior TS group, the femoral tunnel was usually located deeper on the X-axis and more superior on the Y-axis, which corresponds to a more proximal position, than in the anterior group (deeper on the X-axis and superior on the Y-axis). Moreover, the femoral tunnel locations in this group were more compactly distributed than those in the anterior group. The TS group showed significantly better reduction of postoperative PATS in the lateral compartments than the anterior group (anterior group vs. TS group: lateral compartment, 3.2 ± 3.1 vs. 4.5 ± 3.2 mm; p = .016). Significantly better results were found in the TS group for knee stability as assessed by the pivot-shift grade (p = .044); however, there were no significant differences between the two groups with respect to patient-reported outcome measures (p > .05) and other complications (p = .090).

CONCLUSION

Our results suggest that positioning the femoral tunnel using the posterior TS portal approach may lead to better outcomes in terms of PATS and rotational stability compared to the anterior portal approach in ACLR.

The Role of Artificial Intelligence in Anterior Cruciate Ligament Injuries: Current Concepts and Future Perspectives

The remarkable progress in data aggregation and deep learning algorithms has positioned artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning (ML) to revolutionize the field of medicine. AI is becoming more and more prevalent in the healthcare sector, and its impact on orthopedic surgery is already evident in several fields. This review aims to examine the literature that explores the comprehensive clinical relevance of AI-based tools utilized before, during, and after anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction. The review focuses on current clinical applications and future prospects in preoperative management, encompassing risk prediction and diagnostics; intraoperative tools, specifically navigation, identifying complex anatomic landmarks during surgery; and postoperative applications in terms of postoperative care and rehabilitation. Additionally, AI tools in educational and training settings are presented. Orthopedic surgeons are showing a growing interest in AI, as evidenced by the applications discussed in this review, particularly those related to ACL injury. The exponential increase in studies on AI tools applicable to the management of ACL tears promises a significant future impact in its clinical application, with growing attention from orthopedic surgeons.

Patient specific instrumentation in ACL reconstruction: a proof-of-concept cadaver experiment assessing drilling accuracy when using 3D printed guides

INTRODUCTION

Accurate positioning of the femoral tunnel in ACL reconstruction is of the utmost importance to reduce the risk of graft failure. Limited visibility during arthroscopy and a wide anatomical variance attribute to femoral tunnel malposition using conventional surgical techniques. The purpose of this study was to determine whether a patient specific 3D printed surgical guide allows for in vitro femoral tunnel positioning within 2 mm of the planned tunnel position.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A patient specific guide for femoral tunnel positioning in ACL reconstruction was created for four human cadaveric knee specimens based on routine clinical MRI data. Fitting properties were judged by two orthopedic surgeons. MRI scanning was performed both pre- and post-procedure. The planned tunnel endpoint was compared to the actual drilled femoral tunnel.

RESULTS

This patient specific 3D printed guide showed a mean deviation of 5.0 mm from the center of the planned femoral ACL origin.

CONCLUSION

In search to improve accuracy and consistency of femoral tunnel positioning in ACL reconstruction, the use of a patient specific 3D printed surgical guide is a viable option to explore further. The results are comparable to those of conventional techniques; however, further design improvements are necessary to improve accuracy and enhance reproducibility.

Navigation in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: State of the art

Computer navigation (CN) for anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) surgery has been used mainly for two purposes: to enhance the accuracy of tunnel position and to evaluate the kinematics of the ACL reconstruction (ACLR) and the stability achieved by different surgical techniques. Many studies have shown that navigation may improve the accuracy of anatomical tunnel orientation and position during ACL reconstructive surgery compared with normal arthroscopic tunnel placement, especially regarding the femoral side. At the same time, it has become the gold-standard method for intraoperative knee kinematic assessment, as it permits a quantitative multidirectional knee joint laxity evaluation. CN in ACL surgery has been associated with diverse problems. First, in most optic systems additional skin incisions and drill holes in the femoral bone are required for fixation of a reference frame to the femur. Second, additional radiation exposure and extra medical cost to the patient for preoperative planning are usually needed. Third, CN, due to additional steps, has more opportunities for error during preoperative planning, intraoperative registration, and operation. Fourth, soft tissues, including the skin and subcutaneous tissues, are usually not considered during the preoperative planning, which can be a problem for kinematic and stability assessment. Many studies have concluded that ACLR using a CN system is more expensive than conventional surgery, it adds extra time to the surgery and it is not mitigated by better clinical outcomes. This, combined with costs and invasiveness, has limited the use of CN to research-related cases. Future technology should prioritize less invasive intra-operative surgical navigation.

Computer-assisted navigation in ACL reconstruction improves anatomic tunnel placement with similar clinical outcomes

BACKGROUND

While the use of navigation systems in anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction theoretically improves tunnel placement accuracy and clinical outcomes, the existing literature remains inconclusive. We aimed to evaluate the potential benefits of navigated ACL reconstruction on tunnel placement and clinical outcomes.

METHODS

In this retrospective study, we evaluated a cohort of patients who underwent conventional or navigated (OrthoPilot system) primary ACL reconstruction at our institution from June 2004 to October 2009. Anteroposterior and lateral radiographic knee assessments were evaluated to assess postoperative tunnel positioning. Clinical outcomes, including the International Knee Documentation Committee classification, Lysholm score, and Tegner score, were evaluated preoperatively and 1-year postoperatively. Radiographic and clinical outcomes were compared and analysed using independent 2-sample t-tests and Chi-square tests.

RESULTS

Sixty patients met the inclusion criteria and were included for analysis, comprising of 26 navigated and 34 conventional reconstructions. Postoperative radiographs showed no differences in tibial tunnel position between both groups, but a significantly smaller deviation from the recommended position in the navigated group (navigated: 5.96 %; conventional: 7.92 %; p = 0.008). Femoral tunnel placements in the navigated group were significantly more perpendicularly away from the Blumensaat line (navigated: 38.90 %; conventional: 31.94 %; p = 0.001), with a greater deviation from recommended position (navigated: 11.00 %; conventional: 6.94 %; p = 0.009). There were no differences in 1-year postoperative clinical outcomes (p > 0.05).

CONCLUSION

Navigated ACL reconstruction resulted in a more anatomic femoral tunnel placement and similar clinical outcomes as conventional reconstruction. Further research should be conducted to clarify the potential biomechanical and clinical impacts of navigated ACL reconstruction.

Current and future of anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction techniques

In recent years, anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction has generally yielded favorable outcomes. However, ACL reconstruction has not provided satisfactory results in terms of the rate of returning to sports and prevention of osteoarthritis (OA) progression. In this paper, we outline current techniques for ACL reconstruction such as graft materials, double-bundle or single-bundle reconstruction, femoral tunnel drilling, all-inside technique, graft fixation, preservation of remnant, anterolateral ligament reconstruction, ACL repair, revision surgery, treatment for ACL injury with OA and problems, and discuss expected future trends. To enable many more orthopedic surgeons to achieve excellent ACL reconstruction outcomes with less invasive surgery, further studies aimed at improving surgical techniques are warranted. Further development of biological augmentation and robotic surgery technologies for ACL reconstruction is also required.

Remnant preservation does not affect accuracy of tibial tunnel positioning in single-bundle ACL reconstruction

PURPOSE

Remnant preservation, in anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction, has potential biological advantages. However, graft positioning remains vital to functional outcome and the prevention of failure. The aim of this study was to investigate the accuracy and precision of tibial tunnel positioning in remnant preservation single-bundle hamstring reconstruction.

METHODS

Fifty consecutive adult patients, with isolated ACL rupture, were recruited to a prospective study. Remnant preservation was performed in all cases where > 25% of the native ACL was present. Three-dimensional computer tomography was preformed 3-6 months post-operatively to assess tibial tunnel position (using a grid-based measurement). Accuracy and precision of this technique were assessed against published anatomical data in direct comparison with the group where remnant preservation could not be performed.

RESULTS

Two patients withdrew following surgery. In the remaining groups (31 remnant preservation; 17 non-remnant preservation), no difference was demonstrated in tunnel position (40.4 ± 6.7% (anterior-to-posterior) and 47.4 ± 1.5% (medial-to-lateral) vs. 38.8 ± 4.9% and 46.7 ± 1.5%, respectively; n.s.), accuracy (6.1% vs. 4.8%; n.s.) or precision (3.9% vs. 2.8%; n.s.).

CONCLUSIONS

Remnant preservation can be safely performed without compromising tunnel position. Therefore, the potential benefits of this technique can be utilised, in clinical practice, without sacrificing the ability to optimize tibial tunnel positioning.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

III.

Femoral Tunnel Placement Analysis in ACL Reconstruction Through Use of a Novel 3-Dimensional Reference With Biplanar Stereoradiographic Imaging

Background:

The femoral-sided anatomic footprint of the anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) has been widely studied during the past decades. Nonanatomic placement is an important cause of ACL reconstruction (ACLR) failure.

Purpose:

To describe femoral tunnel placement in ACLR through use of a comprehensive 3-dimensional (3D) cylindrical coordinate system combining both the traditional clockface technique and the quadrant method. Our objective was to validate this technique and evaluate its reproducibility.

Study Design:

Descriptive laboratory study.

Methods:

The EOS Imaging System was used to make 3D models of the knee for 37 patients who had undergone ACLR. We designed an automated cylindrical reference software program individualized to the distal femoral morphology of each patient. Cylinder parameters were collected from 2 observers’ series of 3D models. Each independent observer also manually measured the corresponding parameters using a lateral view of the 3D contours and a 2-dimensional stereoradiographic image for the corresponding patient.

Results:

The average cylinder produced from the first observer’s EOS 3D models had a 30.0° orientation (95% CI, 28.4°-31.5°), 40.4 mm length (95% CI, 39.3-41.4 mm), and 19.3 mm diameter (95% CI, 18.6-20.0 mm). For the second observer, these measurements were 29.7° (95% CI, 28.1°-31.3°), 40.7 mm (95% CI, 39.7-41.8 mm), and 19.7 mm (95% CI, 18.8-20.6 mm), respectively. Our method showed moderate intertest intraclass correlation among all 3 measuring techniques for both length (r = 0.68) and diameter (r = 0.63) but poor correlation for orientation (r = 0.44). In terms of interobserver reproducibility of the automated EOS 3D method, similar results were obtained: moderate to excellent correlations for length (r = 0.95; P < .001) and diameter (r = 0.66; P < .001) but poor correlation for orientation (r = 0.29; P < .08). With this reference system, we were able to describe the placement of each individual femoral tunnel aperture, averaging a difference of less than 10 mm from the historical anatomic description by Bernard et al.

Conclusion:

This novel 3D cylindrical coordinate system using biplanar, stereoradiographic, low-irradiation imaging showed a precision comparable with standard manual measurements for ACLR femoral tunnel placement. Our results also suggest that automated cylinders issued from EOS 3D models show adequate accuracy and reproducibility.

Clinical Relevance:

This technique will open multiple possibilities in ACLR femoral tunnel placement in terms of preoperative planning, postoperative feedback, and even intraoperative guidance with augmented reality.

A comparison of femoral tunnel placement in ACL reconstruction using a 70° arthroscope through the anterolateral portal versus a 30° arthroscope through the anteromedial portal: a pilot 3D-CT study

Background

Graft malposition is a risk factor for failure of anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. A 70° arthroscope improves visualisation of the medial wall of the lateral femoral condyle without switching portals. We investigated whether the use of this arthroscope affected the accuracy and precision of femoral tunnel placement.

Methods

Fifty consecutive adult patients were recruited. Following one withdrawal and two exclusions, 47 patients (30 in group 1 (70° arthroscope), 17 in group 2 (30° arthroscope)) underwent three-dimensional computed tomography imaging using a grid-based system to measure tunnel position.

Results

No difference was found in the accuracy or precision of tunnels (mean position: group 1 = 33.3 ± 6.0% deep–shallow, 27.2 ± 5.2% high–low; group 2 = 31.7 ± 6.9% deep–shallow, 29.0 ± 6.2% high–low; not significant). A post-hoc power analysis suggests a study of 106 patients would be required.

Conclusions

This pilot study suggests that tunnel position is not affected by the arthroscope used. An appropriately powered study could investigate this finding alongside other potential benefits of using a 70° arthroscope for this procedure.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02816606. Registered on 28 June 2016.

Femoral offset guide facilitates accurate and precise femoral tunnel placement for single-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to compare the accuracy and precision of femoral tunnel placement by expert and novice surgeons using an offset guide for single-bundle ACL reconstruction via the anteromedial (AM) portal.

METHODS

Twenty-five single-bundle ACL reconstructions performed by a novice surgeon were matched with 25 ACL reconstructions performed by an expert surgeon, based on one-to-one propensity score matching. The same technique was used by both groups for femoral tunnel placement using a 7-mm offset guide through the AM portal. Using the Bernard and Hertel grid method for postoperative three-dimensional reconstructed computed tomography, the accuracy and precision of various tunnel positions were compared.

RESULTS

No differences were found between the proximal-distal and anterior-posterior femoral tunnel placements by the two groups (proximal-distal; 30.5% involving experts, and 32.5% by novices, n.s) (anterior-posterior; 32.6% involving experts, and 31.6% by novice, n.s). The accuracy of the femoral tunnel positions, based on the average distance from the tunnel center to the center of ACL direct insertion, was similar between the two groups (n.s). No differences were found between the groups in terms of precision of femoral tunnel positions (n.s).

CONCLUSION

Novice surgeons can achieve accuracy and precision comparable to experts in creating femoral tunnels via single-bundle ACL reconstruction through the AM portal using a femoral offset guide. We recommend the use of a femoral offset guide for ACL reconstruction during the learning phase of a novice surgeon for effective tunnel placement to reduce the learning curve required to perform accurate and reproducible ACL reconstruction.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Case-control study, Level III.

Post-operative 3D CT feedback improves accuracy and precision in the learning curve of anatomic ACL femoral tunnel placement

PURPOSE

To evaluate the feedback from post-operative three-dimensional computed tomography (3D-CT) on femoral tunnel placement in the learning process, to obtain an anatomic anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction.

METHODS

A series of 60 consecutive patients undergoing primary ACL reconstruction using autologous hamstrings single-bundle outside-in technique were prospectively included in the study. ACL reconstructions were performed by the same trainee-surgeon during his learning phase of anatomic ACL femoral tunnel placement. A CT scan with dedicated tunnel study was performed in all patients within 48 h after surgery. The data obtained from the CT scan were processed into a three-dimensional surface model, and a true medial view of the lateral femoral condyle was used for the femoral tunnel placement analysis. Two independent examiners analysed the tunnel placements. The centre of femoral tunnel was measured using a quadrant method as described by Bernard and Hertel. The coordinates measured were compared with anatomic coordinates values described in the literature [deep-to-shallow distance (X-axis) 28.5%; high-to-low distance (Y-axis) 35.2%]. Tunnel placement was evaluated in terms of accuracy and precision. After each ACL reconstruction, results were shown to the surgeon to receive an instant feedback in order to achieve accurate correction and improve tunnel placement for the next surgery. Complications and arthroscopic time were also recorded.

RESULTS

Results were divided into three consecutive series (1, 2, 3) of 20 patients each. A trend to placing femoral tunnel slightly shallow in deep-to-shallow distance and slightly high in high-to-low distance was observed in the first and the second series. A progressive improvement in tunnel position was recorded from the first to second series and from the second to the third series. Both accuracy (+52.4%) and precision (+55.7%) increased from the first to the third series (p < 0.001). Arthroscopic time decreased from a mean of 105 min in the first series to 57 min in the third series (p < 0.001). After 50 ACL reconstructions, a satisfactory anatomic femoral tunnel was reached.

CONCLUSION

Feedback from post-operative 3D-CT is effective in the learning process to improve accuracy and precision of femoral tunnel placement in order to obtain anatomic ACL reconstruction and helps to reduce also arthroscopic time and learning curve. For clinical relevance, trainee-surgeons should use feedback from post-operative 3DCT to learn anatomic ACL femoral tunnel placement and apply it appropriately.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Consecutive case series, Level IV.

A Method of Accurate Bone Tunnel Placement for Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction Based on 3-Dimensional Printing Technology: A Cadaveric Study

PURPOSE

To explore a method of bone tunnel placement for anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction based on 3-dimensional (3D) printing technology and to assess its accuracy.

METHODS

Twenty human cadaveric knees were scanned by thin-layer computed tomography (CT). To obtain data on bones used to establish a knee joint model by computer software, customized bone anchors were installed before CT. The reference point was determined at the femoral and tibial footprint areas of the ACL. The site and direction of the bone tunnels of the femur and tibia were designed and calibrated on the knee joint model according to the reference point. The resin template was designed and printed by 3D printing. Placement of the bone tunnels was accomplished by use of templates, and the cadaveric knees were scanned again to compare the concordance of the internal opening of the bone tunnels and reference points.

RESULTS

The twenty 3D printing templates were designed and printed successfully. CT data analysis between the planned and actual drilled tunnel positions showed mean deviations of 0.57 mm (range, 0-1.5 mm; standard deviation, 0.42 mm) at the femur and 0.58 mm (range, 0-1.5 mm; standard deviation, 0.47 mm) at the tibia.

CONCLUSIONS

The accuracy of bone tunnel placement for ACL reconstruction in cadaveric adult knees based on 3D printing technology is high.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

This method can improve the accuracy of bone tunnel placement for ACL reconstruction in clinical sports medicine.

Current use of navigation system in ACL surgery: a historical review

PURPOSE

The present review aims to analyse the available literature regarding the use of navigation systems in ACL reconstructive surgery underling the evolution during the years.

METHODS

A research of indexed scientific papers was performed on PubMed and Cochrane Library database. The research was performed in December 2015 with no publication year restriction. Only English-written papers and related to the terms ACL, NAVIGATION, CAOS and CAS were considered. Two reviewers independently selected only those manuscripts that presented at least the application of navigation system for ACL reconstructive surgery.

RESULTS

One hundred and forty-six of 394 articles were finally selected. In this analysis, it was possible to review the main uses of navigation system in ACL surgery including tunnel positioning for primary and revision surgery and kinematic assessment of knee laxity before and after different surgical procedures. In the early years, until 2006, navigation system was mainly used to improve tunnel positioning, but since the last decade, this tool has been principally used for kinematics evaluation. Increased accuracy of tunnel placement was observed using navigation surgery, especially, regarding femoral, 42 of 146 articles used navigation to guide tunnel positioning. During the following years, 82 of 146 articles have used navigation system to evaluate intraoperative knee kinematic. In particular, the importance of controlling rotatory laxity to achieve better surgical outcomes has been underlined.

CONLUSIONS

Several applications have been described and despite the contribution of navigation systems, its potential uses and theoretical advantages, there are still controversies about its clinical benefit. The present papers summarize the most relevant studies that have used navigation system in ACL reconstruction. In particular, the analysis identified four main applications of the navigation systems during ACL reconstructive surgery have been identified: (1) technical assistance for tunnel placement; (2) improvement in knowledge of the kinematic behaviour of ACL and other structures; (3) comparison of effectiveness of different surgical techniques in controlling laxities; (4) navigation system performance to improve the outcomes of ACL reconstruction and cost-effectiveness.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

IV.

Accuracy and Reproducibility of the Femoral Tunnel With Different Viewing Techniques in the ACL Reconstruction

The purpose of this study was to compare the accuracy and reproducibility of the femoral tunnel location among 3 different viewing techniques used during outside-in anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction with 3- dimensional (3-D) computed tomography (CT): (1) an anterolateral (AL) or anteromedial (AM) portal with a 30° arthroscope (A group) vs (2) a posterolateral (PL) portal with a 70° arthroscope (PL group) vs (3) a trans-septal (TS) portal with a 30° arthroscope (TS group). A total of 106 patients undergoing outside-in ACL reconstruction were recruited. Patients were divided into 3 groups according to viewing technique (A group=36 patients; PL group=35 patients; TS group=35 patients). Femoral tunnel locations were evaluated with the quadrant method and the anatomic coordinate axes measurement (ACAM) method in the medial wall of the lateral femoral condyle using 3-D reconstructed CT. The accuracy and reproducibility of the femoral tunnel locations were compared among the 3 techniques. The accuracy of the tunnel location was higher in the TS group by the quadrant method as well as the ACAM method. The reproducibility of the femoral tunnel position in the TS group was the highest, and the femoral tunnel locations of the TS group were more compactly distributed compared with those of the A and PL groups. The accuracy and reproducibility of the femoral tunnel location could be improved with a TS portal viewed using a 30° arthroscope. Anteromedial/anterolateral and PL portals viewed using a 70° arthroscope showed no difference. [Orthopedics. 2016; 39(6):e1085-e1091.].