Clinical and radiological long-term outcome after posterior cruciate ligament reconstruction and nonanatomical popliteus bypass

Open approaches for cruciate ligament reconstruction in knee dislocations: A technical note and case series

INTRODUCTION

Arthroscopic surgery is the gold standard for cruciate ligament reconstruction in multi-ligament knee injuries. However, hospitals in limited-resource settings often lack arthroscopic-trained surgeons or equipment. Open approaches for treating knee dislocations can overcome many of these limitations.

METHODOLOGY

This study aims to describe techniques for open approaches in a supine patient to address the cruciate ligaments in multi-ligament knee injuries and to review associated complications and clinical outcomes in a retrospective case series.

RESULTS

Ten patients with multi-ligament knee injuries who had undergone open cruciate ligament reconstruction between July 2016 and November 2018 were retrospectively identified. Open approaches were performed owing to the extravasation of arthroscopy fluid into the posterior compartment (3) or a large traumatic arthrotomy (7). Complications and patient-reported outcomes were analysed. Eight of the 10 patients were followed up at 10 months postoperatively (range, 5-23 months). None had iatrogenic neurovascular damage. Median outcomes scores were: visual analogue scale, 45 (range, 0-100); Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score-Physical Function Short Form, 81.4 (range, 75-100); Lysholm, 85 (range, 67-92).

DISCUSSION

Open approaches were safe and useful in treating cruciate ligaments and should be considered in arthroscopy fluid extraversion and large traumatic arthrotomies.

The Clinical Outcome of Arthroscopic Versus Open Popliteal Tendon Reconstruction Combined With Posterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction in Patients With Type A Posterolateral Rotational Instability

PURPOSE

To compare the objective and subjective clinical outcomes of arthroscopic versus open popliteal tendon (PT) reconstruction combined with posterior cruciate ligament reconstruction in patients with type A posterolateral corner injury.

METHODS

From January 2012 to March 2016, patients were eligible for inclusion in this study if they (1) had type A posterolateral rotational instability according to Fanelli's classification, (2) underwent arthroscopic (group A) or open PT (group B) reconstruction, and (3) were followed for a minimum of 2 years with second-look arthroscopic findings. For evaluation, this study used subjective scoring systems (Lysholm, Tegner, and International Knee Documentation Committee subjective scores), knee stability examinations (side-to-side differences of tibial external rotation angle by dial test and posterior and varus stress radiographs), and second-look arthroscopic lateral gutter drive-through tests during hardware removal operations.

RESULTS

A total of 38 patients were included in the study. The mean follow-up period was 31.0 ± 5.8 months in group A (n = 21) and 34.8 ± 12.7 months in group B (n = 17). At the final follow-up, all subjective and objective evaluation results were significantly improved compared with the preoperative condition. There were no significant intergroup differences in Lysholm score (group A, 72.7 ± 17.2; group B, 67.2 ± 14.2; P = .818), Tegner score (group A, 2; group B, 2; P = .710), or International Knee Documentation Committee subjective score (group A, 73.0 ± 13.8; group B, 69.7 ± 20.7; P = .561) at the final follow-up. In terms of objective evaluations, there was no difference in side-to-side difference of posterior stress radiography (group A, 4.0 ± 3.2 mm; group B, 5.0 ± 2.9 mm; P = .336) or lateral gutter drive-through test positive rate (group A, 1/21, 4.8%; group B, 2/17, 11.8%; P = .426).

CONCLUSION

Both arthroscopic and open PT reconstruction significantly improved the knee stability and subjective outcome of patients with type A posterolateral rotational instability. In comparison with the open procedure, the arthroscopic PT reconstruction showed similar subjective and objective clinical outcomes.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III, retrospective cohort study.

Prospective analysis using a patient-based health-related scale shows lower functional scores after posterior cruciate ligament reconstructions as compared with anterior cruciate ligament reconstructions of the knee

PURPOSE

This study evaluated the treatment outcome of posterior cruciate ligament (PCL) reconstruction using the Medical Outcome Study 36-item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36), a patient-based quality of life (QOL) questionnaire comparing it with anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction.

METHODS

Patients who underwent reconstruction at our center for PCL (n = 24) or ACL (n = 197) injury were studied. The patients were evaluated using SF-36, visual analogue scale (VAS) for knee pain, Lysholm scale, posterior or anterior tibial translation and range of motion (ROM) before surgery until 24 months after surgery. Results were compared.

RESULTS

In the ACL group, all evaluation methods showed significant improvement after surgery. In the PCL group, however, improvement was observed in only three of eight subscales of the SF-36, Lysholm score and posterior tibial translation after surgery. In intergroup comparison, the PCL group showed inferior performance in three subscales of the SF-36, Lysholm score and ROM for flexion compared with the ACL group.

CONCLUSIONS

The surgical outcome of PCL reconstruction was inferior to that of ACL reconstruction both in patient-based and conventional doctor-based assessments. An improved surgical technique for PCL is required.

The predictive effect of anatomic femoral and tibial graft tunnel placement in posterior cruciate ligament reconstruction on functional and radiological outcome

PURPOSE

Biomechanical reports have advocated anatomic graft tunnel placement for reconstruction of the posterior cruciate ligament (PCL) to restore knee joint stability and facilitate optimal functional outcome. However, in vivo investigations that correlate tunnel position to functional results are lacking so far. This study evaluates the anatomic accuracy of femoral and tibial tunnel apertures on postoperative computed tomography (CT) scans and compares these findings to subjective and objective clinical outcome parameters.

METHODS

After single-bundle PCL reconstruction, 29 patients were stratified into several subgroups according to the anatomic accuracy of femoral and tibial tunnel apertures measured on postoperative CT scans. A threshold value for the centres of the tunnel apertures was determined using a measurement grid system as a radiographic reference. To evaluate the functional and radiological results, visual analogue scale, International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC), Tegner, Lysholm, Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score and osteoarthritis scores were obtained.

RESULTS

Comparison between functional outcome and tunnel position yielded a statistically significant difference for subjective IKDC score and angle segment α and for objective stability and tunnel position P3 but no statistically significant difference with respect to intercondylar depth, intercondylar height and tibial tunnel position P2. No correlation was found between anatomic tunnel position and present or progressive osteoarthritis on follow-up. Of the patients, 72 % classified their result as excellent and good and 90 % would repeat surgical treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite a small sample size and subject to the threshold values we used, our data indicate a potentially minor effect of anatomic tunnel placement on midterm functional outcome following PCL reconstruction.