Better rotational control but similar outcomes with the outside-in versus the transtibial drilling technique for anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a systematic review of comparative trials

Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction with Modified Transtibial Technique: Outcomes and Return to Sport in Athletes

BACKGROUND

Anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injuries are common among athletes and significantly impact their knee stability and performance. Surgical reconstruction is the standard treatment. The modified transtibial technique has emerged as a promising surgical approach for optimal graft positioning and complication reduction.

METHODS

A retrospective study of athletes who underwent primary ACL reconstruction with the modified transtibial technique was conducted. Clinical outcomes were evaluated using the Lysholm and International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) subjective scores and objective knee stability assessments. Return-to-sport rates and associated factors were analyzed.

RESULTS

Forty-four athletes were included (thirty-seven males, seven females; mean age 21.2 ± 5.0 years). At mean follow-up of 27.0 ± 12.2 months, significant improvements in the Lysholm and IKDC subjective scores were observed. Overall, 88.2% of athletes returned to sports, and 65.9% achieved their pre-injury levels. Return to pre-injury level was defined as regaining the same type, intensity, and frequency of sport participation as before the injury occurred. Professional athletes showed significantly higher return-to-pre-injury-sport rates (79.3%) than recreational athletes (40.0%, p = 0.0091). Concomitant meniscus injuries negatively impacted return-to-sport rates (92.9% versus 66.7%, p = 0.0397). The overall failure rate was 4.6% (2/44; 95% confidence level [CI]: 0.6-15.5%) with two cases of graft insufficiency or re-rupture.

CONCLUSIONS

ACL reconstruction with the modified transtibial technique provides favorable clinical outcomes, high return-to-sport rates, and low failure rates, particularly among professional athletes. Meniscus preservation is crucial for optimizing post-operative recovery. Future research should focus on long-term outcomes and comparative studies with other ACL reconstruction techniques.

Anteromedial Portal Technique, but Not Outside-in Technique, Is Superior to Standard Transtibial Technique in Knee Stability and Functional Recovery After Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: A Network Meta-analysis

PURPOSE

To compare the postoperative outcomes of 4 different femoral drilling techniques in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction.

METHODS

Three databases were searched for randomized controlled trials comparing any 2 or more of the following femoral drilling techniques in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: standard transtibial (sTT), anteromedial portal (AMP), outside-in (OI), or modified transtibial (mTT) technique. A Bayesian network meta-analysis was performed to assess postoperative stability and functional recovery in terms of the side-to-side difference (measured by arthrometry), Lachman test, pivot-shift test, International Knee Documentation Committee subjective and objective scores, Lysholm score, and Tegner score. The Fisher exact probability test and χ2 test were used to compare the incidences of infection and graft rupture, respectively.

RESULTS

We included 20 randomized controlled trials involving 1,515 patients. The AMP technique showed a lower side-to-side difference (standardized mean difference, -0.33; 95% credible interval [CrI], -0.53 to -0.12), higher negative rate on the pivot-shift test (odds ratio, 2.19; 95% CrI, 1.38 to 3.44), and higher International Knee Documentation Committee objective score (odds ratio, 3.13; 95% CrI, 1.42 to 7.82) than the sTT technique. However, knee stability and functional outcomes did not differ significantly between the OI and sTT techniques. Safety outcomes of the mTT technique were unavailable. The incidence of graft rupture was 5.20% for the OI technique, 2.27% for the AMP technique, and 1.51% for the sTT technique. The OI technique had a significantly higher incidence of graft rupture than the sTT technique (χ2 = 4.421, P = .035). No significant difference in the incidence of infection was found between the sTT, AMP, and OI techniques (P = .281).

CONCLUSIONS

The AMP technique, but not the OI technique, was superior to the sTT technique in knee stability and functional recovery. The OI technique had a higher incidence of graft rupture than the sTT technique. There was no significant difference between the AMP and OI techniques or between the mTT technique and any other femoral drilling technique.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level II, meta-analysis of Level I and II studies.

Biomechanical Effects of Aspect Ratio of the Knee during Outside-In Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction Surgery

We analyzed tunnel length, graft bending angle, and stress of the graft according to tunnel entry position and aspect ratio (ASR: ratio of anteroposterior depth to mediolateral width) of the articular surface for the distal femur during single-bundle outside-in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) surgery. We performed multiflexible body dynamic analyses with four ASR (98, 105, 111, and 117%) knee models. The various ASRs were associated with approximately 1 mm changes in tunnel length. The graft bending angle increased when the entry point was far from the lateral epicondyle and was larger when the ASR was smaller. The graft was at maximum stress, 117% ASR, when the tunnel entry point was near the lateral epicondyle. The maximum stress value at a 5 mm distance from the lateral epicondyle was 3.5 times higher than the 15 mm entry position, and the cases set to 111% and 105% ASR showed 1.9 times higher stress values when at a 5 mm distance compared with a 15 mm distance. In the case set at 98% ASR, the low-stress value showed a without-distance difference from the lateral epicondyle. Our results suggest that there is no relationship between the ASR and femoral tunnel length. A smaller ASR causes a higher graft bending angle, and a larger ASR causes greater stress in the graft.

Does radiological evaluation of endobutton positioning in the sagittal plane affect clinical functional results in single-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction?

INTRODUCTION

Sports injuries are increasing today due to the increased interest in sports. The most common injured knee ligament is the anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) in sport injuries. Accordingly, surgical treatment of the ACL is performed frequently. In this study, it was aimed to retrospectively evaluate whether the location of an endobutton on lateral knee radiography was effective on knee functional scores in patients who underwent ACL reconstruction.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

One hundred thirty patients who underwent ACL reconstruction between January 2015 and February 2019 were identified. The patients were divided into three groups according to the location of the endobutton on lateral radiographs taken in the postoperative period. Group 1 patients were classified as anterior, group 2 as middle, and group 3 as posterior according to the location of the endobutton. Functional scoring, physical examination tests, comparative thigh diameter measurements, and single-leg hop tests were compared between the groups. It was evaluated as to whether there was a statistically significant difference between the groups.

RESULTS

There were 38 patients in group 1, 63 patients in group 2, and 29 patients in group 3. The mean age was 29.1 in group 1, 29.1 in group 2, and 29.7 in group 3. The mean follow-up period of the patients was 18.4 months in group 1, 19.1 months in group 2, and 21.4 months in group 3. The average Lysholm score was 92.9 in group 1, 93.3 in group 2, and 91.7 in group 3. The mean modified Cincinnati scores were 27.0, 27.1, and 26.6, respectively, in the groups. The mean IKDC score of the subjective knee assessments was 92.5, 92.8, and 91, respectively, according to the groups. The average thigh atrophy value was 1 cm, 1 cm, and 1.2 cm, respectively, in the groups. In the single-leg hop test, 34 patients in group 1 jump to over 85% of the distance compared with the intact side, while 58 patients in group 2, and 23 patients in group 3 were successfully able to jump this distance. The effect of the placement of the endobutton in the anterior, middle or posterior was not statistically significant on functional scores and physical examination results. In patients with endobuttons in the middle, functional scores were found better than in those with anterior or posterior placement.

CONCLUSIONS

No statistically significant differences were found in clinical functional results when comparing patients' endobutton location on femur. For this reason, surgical time should not be extended using unnecessary extra effort to change the orientation of the exit hole during surgery.

[Progress of different methods for femoral tunnel positioning in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction]

OBJECTIVE

To systematically review the progress of different methods for femoral tunnel positioning in anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction and provide a clinical reference for treatment of ACL rupture.

METHODS

The literature about the femoral tunnel positioning in ACL reconstruction was widely reviewed. The advantages and disadvantages and the clinical results of each method were summarized.

RESULTS

Currently in ACL reconstruction, methods for femoral tunnel positioning include transtibial technique (TT), anteromedial technique (AM), outside-in (OI), modified TT (mTT), and computer assisted surgery. There is no significant difference in the postoperative effectiveness between TT technique and AM technique. Compared with the TT technique, the OI technique has higher rotational stability of knee, but there is no significant difference in clinical results. The femoral tunnel located by mTT technique is closer to the anatomical placement than that of TT technique, but mTT technique is not effective for systematically anatomic femoral tunnel positioning, and further research is needed to prove its advantages.

CONCLUSION

Different femoral tunnel positioning methods have their own advantages and disadvantages, and there is no definite evidence that one is superior than the rest.

Predictive factors for failure of anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction via the trans-tibial technique

INTRODUCTION

Factors for graft failure after trans-tibial (TT) ACL reconstruction, including anterolateral ligament (ALL) injury and degree of synovialization, remain unclear. This study is to evaluate the risk factors for graft failures after TT ACL reconstruction including ALL injury and synovialization.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A total 391 patients who underwent primary TT ACL reconstruction were included. Failure was defined as greater than grade 2 laxity on the Lachman or pivot shift tests or 5 mm of anterior translation on stress radiograph. After applying inclusion/exclusion criteria, 31 patients with failure were categorized as group 1 and 89 patients without failure were categorized as group 2. Chi-square test and Cox proportional hazard analyses were performed.

RESULTS

Preoperatively, 64 patients had ALL injuries (53.3%), 58 had medial meniscal (MM) tears (48.3%), and 62 had lateral meniscal (LM) tears (51.6%). Ninety-three patients (77.5%) had acute injuries and 27 had chronic injuries as per 6-weeks duration. Significant risk factors for failure were LM tear (hazard ratio [HR], 4.018; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.677-9.629; p = 0.002), chronicity (HR, 6.812; 95% CI 2.758-16.824; p = 0.000), presence of ALL injury (HR, 3.655; 95% CI 1.442-9.265; p = 0.006), and poor synovialization (HR, 3.134; 95% CI 1.298-7.566; p = 0.011) in Cox proportional hazard analysis. If combined MM and LM tears were found, an increased risk of failure was also identified (combined tears: HR, 3.951; 95% CI 1.754-8.901; p = 0.001/preoperative high-grade laxity: HR, 4.546; 95% CI 1.875-11.02; p = 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Chronic ACL injuries, meniscus tear, preoperative ALL injuries, preoperative high-grade laxity and poor synovialization are significant risk factors. Therefore, these factors should be carefully assessed and properly treated in TT ACL reconstruction.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

IV, retrospective cohort study.

Anterior Cruciate Ligament Re-tear and Revision Reconstruction in the Skeletally Immature Athlete

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

With an increase in high-demand sporting activity, the rate of pediatric and adolescent anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction is increasing. Yet, the failure rates after reconstruction are much higher than the adult population. The purpose of this paper is to understand failure rates, reasons for graft failure, and strategies for successful revision surgery.

RECENT FINDINGS

A complete understanding of the failure etiology is essential for the clinician treating this population prior to revision. This begins with an assessment of post-operative patient compliance and sporting activity. Surgical technique must then be scrutinized for non-anatomic tunnel placement and poor graft size/type. Concurrent bony deformity must also be addressed including lower extremity valgus alignment and tibial slope abnormalities. Meniscus and chondral injury must be aggressively treated. Furthermore, imaging must be examined to look for missed posterolateral corner injury. Lateral extra-articular tenodesis (in the setting of ligamentous laxity or rotational instability) may be also indicated as well. The surgeon can then choose a graft type and surgical technique that optimizes outcome and respects skeletal growth. Prior to surgical intervention, the clinician must also counsel patients in regard to the guarded prognosis and outcomes in this setting. Prolonged rehabilitation protocols/return-to-play timing as well as sporting activity modification in the post-operative period after revision are critical. There is limited literature on revision ACL reconstruction in the skeletally immature athlete. An understanding of all the risk factors for failure is essential in order to achieve treatment success.

Techniques for Femoral Socket Creation in ACL Reconstruction

Anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injury is common and affects a wide variety of individuals. An ACL reconstruction is the treatment of choice for patients with subjective and objective symptoms of instability and is of particular importance to cutting or pivoting athletes. With many variables involved in ACL reconstruction, femoral tunnel placement has been found to affect clinical outcomes with nonanatomic placement being identified as the most common technical error. Traditionally the femoral tunnel was created through the tibial tunnel or transtibial with the use of a guide and a rigid reaming system. Because of proximal, nonanatomic tunnel placement using the transtibial technique, the use of the anteromedial portal and outside-in drilling techniques has allowed placement of the tunnel over the femoral footprint. In this paper, we discuss the difference between the 3 techniques and the advantages and disadvantages of each. The authors then explore the clinical differences and outcomes in techniques by reviewing the relevant literature.

Graft Inclination Angles in Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction Vary Depending on Femoral Tunnel Reaming Method: Comparison Among Transtibial, Anteromedial Portal, and Outside-In Retrograde Drilling Techniques

PURPOSE

To compare graft coronal and sagittal inclination angles in anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction performed by different femoral tunnel drilling techniques with respect to intact native ACL.

METHODS

In total, 72 patients were prospectively enrolled in the study. The inclusion criteria were complete ACL rupture and patient age between 18 and 55 years. Reconstructions were performed using 4 different femoral tunnel drilling technique: transtibial (TT), anteromedial portal with rigid (AMP-RR) or flexible (AMP-FR) reamer, and outside-in retrograde drilling (OI) techniques. Eighteen patients with intact native ACL were included as controls. Sagittal and coronal graft inclination angles were measured by magnetic resonance imaging 6 months after the procedure by 1 radiologist blinded in regards to the used technique.

RESULTS

OI and AMP-FR techniques allowed for the maintenance of native-like ACL inclination in both the sagittal and coronal planes, whereas TT and AMP-RR increased the sagittal angle by a mean of 9.5° (P < .001) and 6.7° (P = .003), respectively, compared with native ACLs. AMP-RR and TT also showed increased sagittal graft inclination compared with AMP-FR (+6.1°, P = .009 and +9.0°, P < .001, respectively) and OI-drilling techniques (+5.5°, P = .024 and +8.4°, P < .001, respectively). No differences were observed among study groups in terms of coronal graft inclination.

CONCLUSIONS

The study hypothesis was partially confirmed, since OI and AMP-FR techniques, but not AMP-RR, using an independent portal for femoral drilling produce a more anatomic graft inclination on the sagittal plane with respect to TT.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

II, prospective comparative study.