Anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction femoral tunnel characteristics using an accessory medial portal versus traditional transtibial drilling

A Single-Surgeon 35-Year Experience With ACL Reconstruction Using Patellar Tendon Auto- and Allografts With the Transtibial Technique

Background

Long-term follow-up for anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) is limited due to heterogeneity in the number of techniques utilized, the number of surgeons included, and attrition bias.

Purpose

To analyze a single surgeon's 35-year experience with ACLR using the transtibial technique, with an emphasis on temporal trends in graft selection and subanalyses on rates of revision surgery, contralateral ACLR, and nonrevision reoperation among different demographic cohorts of patients.

Study Design

Case series; Level of evidence, 4.

Methods

All patients who underwent arthroscopically assisted single-bundle ACLR between 1986 and 2021 were identified from a prospectively maintained single-surgeon registry. Outcomes of interest included revision, reoperation, and contralateral rupture rates.

Results

A total of 2915 ACLRs were performed during the senior surgeon's career. The mean age for primary ACLR was 29.4 ± 14.8 years. During primary ACLR, 98.4% of patients received a central-third bone-patellar tendon-bone (BPTB) graft. Increasing patient age was associated with increasing allograft usage (P < .01), with a significant temporal increase in allograft usage over the senior surgeon's career (P < .01). There was a higher revision rate among younger patients (P < .01), female patients aged 21 to 25 years (P = .01), and patients who received an allograft during the primary procedure (P = .04). The contralateral rupture rate showed no difference between sexes (P = .34); however, patients who underwent ACLR with autograft had a greater rate of contralateral injury compared with those with allograft (P < .01). The contralateral rupture rate was greater than the revision rate (P < .01). The most common causes of nonrevision reoperation were failed meniscal repair, new meniscal tears, arthrofibrosis, and painful hardware removal.

Conclusion

The findings of this single-surgeon registry reveal temporal trends in ACLR over a 35-year career. There was a trend toward increasing BPTB allograft use in ACLR, especially in older patients and revision cases. A greater revision rate was observed among younger patients, female patients, and those receiving allografts during primary surgery. Contralateral ACLR was more common than revision surgery.

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.

Transtibial versus independent femoral tunnel drilling techniques for anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: evaluation of femoral aperture positioning

Background

Femoral tunnel can be drilled through tibial tunnel (TT), or independent of it (TI) by out-in (OI) technique or by anteromedial (AM) technique. No consensus has been reached on which technique achieves more proper femoral aperture position because there have been evolving concepts in the ideal place for femoral aperture placement. This meta-analysis was performed to analyze the current literature comparing femoral aperture placement by TI versus TT techniques in ACL reconstruction.

Methods

We performed a comprehensive systematic review and meta-analysis of English-language literature in PubMed, Cochrane, and Web of Science databases for articles comparing femoral aperture placement by TI versus TT techniques with aperture position assessed by direct measurement or by postoperative imaging, PXR and/or CT and/or MRI.

Results

We included 55 articles with study population of 2401 knees of whom 1252 underwent TI and 1149 underwent TT techniques. The relevant baseline characteristics, whenever compared, were comparable between both groups. There was nonsignificant difference between TI and TT techniques in the distance from aperture center to footprint center and both techniques were unable to accurately recreate the anatomic footprint position. TI technique significantly placed aperture at more posterior position than TT technique. TI technique significantly lowered position of placed aperture perpendicular to Blumensaat’s line (BL) than TT technique, and modifications to TT technique had significant effect on this intervention effect. Regarding sagittal plane aperture placement along both AP anatomical axis and BL, there was nonsignificant difference between both techniques.

Conclusion

Modifications to TT technique could overcome limitations in aperture placement perpendicular to BL. The more anterior placement of femoral aperture by TT technique might be considered, to some extent, a proper position according to recent concept of functional anatomical ACL reconstruction.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13018-022-03040-5.

ACL Reconstruction Graft Angle and Outcomes: Transtibial vs Anteromedial Reconstruction

BACKGROUND

The importance of creating an anatomic anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction has been receiving significant attention. The best technique by which to achieve this anatomic reconstruction continues to be debated. The two most common methods are the transtibial (TT) and anteromedial (AM) techniques. Each has its advantages and disadvantages, and the literature comparing the two remains uncertain.

QUESTIONS/PURPOSES

In this prospective comparative study, we aimed to compare the ACL graft and tunnel angles achieved using the anatomic transtibial (TT) and anteromedial (AM) techniques; compare the ACL graft and tunnel angles in knees that have undergone ACL reconstruction and knees with intact ACLs; and determine whether differences in the graft or tunnel angle produce differences in clinical outcomes, as measured using both physical exam and patient-reported outcomes, after ACL reconstruction.

METHODS

Patients who underwent primary ACL reconstruction with bone-tendon-bone grafts using a TT or AM technique were included. Femoral graft angle (FGA), tibial graft angle (TGA), and sagittal orientation of the reconstructed ACL and contralateral native ACL were measured on post-operative magnetic resonance imaging. Post-operatively, patients underwent measurement of knee stability and completed the Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) survey.

RESULTS

Twenty-nine patients were enrolled (AM group, 14; TT group, 15); at follow-up, KOOS data were available for 26 patients (13 in each group). There were no differences in sagittal ACL graft angle between groups or in comparison with the normal knee. The FGA was more vertical after TT reconstructions; the TGA was comparable between groups. There were no significant differences in 2-year post-operative physical exam measurements or in KOOS scores.

CONCLUSION

Anatomic ACL angle was restored after reconstruction with both the TT and AM techniques, despite different FGAs. No significant differences in clinical outcome were noted between groups on physical exam or KOOS at 2 years after surgery. These results suggest that TT reconstruction results in a graft position similar to that seen in AM reconstruction and that the location of the intra-articular tunnel aperture matters more than the orientation of the tunnel.

Comparison of femoral tunnel length and obliquity of anatomic versus nonanatomic anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: A meta-analysis

Purpose

Theoretical considerations suggest that femoral tunnel length might cause graft mismatch, and femoral tunnel obliquity could be related to the longevity of graft in anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction. However, controversy still exists regarding these issues in the context of the comparison of anatomic and nonanatomic ACL reconstructions. The purpose of this meta-analysis was to compare the length and obliquity of the femoral tunnel created by drilling through either anatomic or nonanatomic ACL reconstructions.

Materials and method

In this meta-analysis, we reviewed studies that compared femoral tunnel length and femoral tunnel obliquity in the coronal plane with the use of anatomic or nonanatomic ACL reconstruction. The major databases were reviewed for appropriate studies from the earliest available date of indexing through December 31, 2018. No restrictions were placed on the language of publication.

Results

Twenty-seven studies met the criteria for inclusion in this meta-analysis. The femur tunnel length of anatomic ACL reconstruction was significantly shorter compared with that of nonanatomic ACL reconstruction by 8.66 mm (95% CI: 7.10–10.22 mm; P<0.001), while the femur tunnel obliquity in the coronal plane of anatomic ACL reconstruction was significantly more oblique versus that of nonanatomic ACL reconstruction by 15.29° (95% CI: 8.07°–22.52°; P<0.001). Similar results in terms of femoral tunnel length were found for the subgroup with cadaveric (7.15 mm; 95% CI: 2.69–11.61 mm; P = 0.002) and noncadaveric (8.96 mm; 95% CI: 7.24–10.69 mm; P<0.001) studies, whereas different results in terms of femoral tunnel obliquity were noted for the subgroup with cadaveric (10.62°; 95% CI: −6.12° to 27.37°; P = 0.21) and noncadaveric (15.86°; 95% CI: 8.11°–23.60°; P<0.001) studies.

Conclusion

Anatomic ACL reconstruction resulted in the femoral tunnel length and femoral tunnel obliquity in the coronal plane being shorter and more oblique, respectively, as compared with nonanatomic ACL reconstruction.

Level of evidence

Therapeutic study, Level III.

Is Anteromedial Drilling Safe in Transphyseal Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction in Adolescents with Growth Remaining?

BACKGROUND

Previous reports of transphyseal drilling in anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction have demonstrated good clinical outcomes without subjective changes in further skeletal development. The purpose of this study is to evaluate radiographic changes during continued growth following a transphyseal ACL reconstruction using an anteromedial femoral (AM) drilling technique in patients with >18 months of growth remaining.

METHODS

A review of consecutive adolescents who underwent a soft tissue transphyseal ACL reconstruction using an AM drilling technique was performed. Inclusion criteria was 18 months of growth remaining based on radiographic bone age and standing radiographs at least one year from the index procedure. Demographic, preoperative, and postoperative data, and follow-up three-foot standing lower extremity radiographs were reviewed. Radiographic data included femoral length, tibial length, total lower extremity length, mechanical axis deviation (MAD), lateral distal femoral angle (LDFA), and medial proximal tibial angle (MPTA).

RESULTS

In total 12 adolescent patients with a mean age of 13.4 years (range, 12.3 to 14.4) and bone age of 13.4 years (11.5 to 14) at the time of surgery were included. At an average of 2.27-year follow-up (412 to 1058 d), there was no difference in the total growth of the operative and nonoperative limb (48.5 mm vs. 47 mm; P=0.36). In addition, the average increases in femoral length (23.4 mm) and tibial length (25.8 mm) were not statistically different between the operative and the nonoperative limb (P=0.12; P=0.75). There was no statistical difference in mechanical axis deviation, LDFA, or MPTA between preoperative and postoperative radiographs. Mean differences in operative and nonoperative coronal angular changes were all <1.5 degrees.

CONCLUSIONS

With at least 2 years of growth remaining, transphyseal ACL reconstruction with anteromedial drilling did not significantly affect the physis or residual growth compared with the contralateral extremity. Although this technique may create a larger defect in the physis, standing radiographs demonstrate there is no change in limb length or angulation in growing adolescents approximately 2 years after surgery.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

This is a case series; Level IV evidence.

Peak stresses shift from femoral tunnel aperture to tibial tunnel aperture in lateral tibial tunnel ACL reconstructions: a 3D graft-bending angle measurement and finite-element analysis

PURPOSE

To investigate the effect of tibial tunnel orientation on graft-bending angle and stress distribution in the ACL graft.

METHODS

Eight cadaveric knees were scanned in extension, 45°, 90°, and full flexion. 3D reconstructions with anatomically placed anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) grafts were constructed with Mimics 14.12^®. 3D graft-bending angles were measured for classic medial tibial tunnels (MTT) and lateral tibial tunnels (LTT) with different drill-guide angles (DGA) (45°, 55°, 65°, and 75°). A pivot shift was performed on 1 knee in a finite-element analysis. The peak stresses in the graft were calculated for eight different tibial tunnel orientations.

RESULTS

In a classic anatomical ACL repair, the largest graft-bending angle and peak stresses are seen at the femoral tunnel aperture. The use of a different DGA at the tibial side does not change the graft-bending angle at the femoral side or magnitude of peak stresses significantly. When using LTT, the largest graft-bending angles and peak stresses are seen at the tibial tunnel aperture.

CONCLUSION

In a classic anatomical ACL repair, peak stresses in the ACL graft are found at the femoral tunnel aperture. When an LTT is used, peak stresses are similar compared to classic ACL repairs, but the location of the peak stress will shift from the femoral tunnel aperture towards the tibial tunnel aperture.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

the risk of graft rupture is similar for both MTTs and LTTs, but the location of graft rupture changes from the femoral tunnel aperture towards the tibial tunnel aperture, respectively.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

I.

The angle of inclination of the native ACL in the coronal and sagittal planes

PURPOSE

The purpose of this cross-sectional study was to evaluate the angle of inclination of the native anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) in both the sagittal and coronal planes and to evaluate these findings based on sex, height, BMI, and skeletal maturity.

METHODS

Inclusion criteria for the study included patients undergoing routine magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) of the knee at a single outpatient orthopedic center who had an intact ACL on MRI. Measurements of the angle of inclination were made on MRIs in both the sagittal and coronal planes. Patients were compared based on sex, height, BMI, and skeletal maturity.

RESULTS

One-hundred and eighty-eight patients were included (36 skeletally immature/152 skeletally mature; 98 male/90 female). The overall angle of inclination was 74.3° ± 4.8° in the coronal plane and 46.9° ± 4.9° in the sagittal plane. Skeletally immature patients (coronal: 71.8° ± 6.1°; sagittal: 44.7° ± 5.5°) were significantly different in both coronal and sagittal planes (P = 0.04 and 0.01, respectively) from skeletally mature patients (coronal: 75.3° ± 4.7°; sagittal: 47.4° ± 4.7°). There were no differences based on sex, height, or BMI.

CONCLUSIONS

There are differences between the angle of inclination findings in this study and other studies, which could be due to MRI and measurement techniques. Clinically, skeletal maturity may be important to account for when using the ACL angle of inclination to evaluate anatomic ACL reconstruction.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Prognostic retrospective study, Level of evidence III.

Transphyseal ACL Reconstruction in Skeletally Immature Patients: Does Independent Femoral Tunnel Drilling Place the Physis at Greater Risk Compared With Transtibial Drilling?

Background:

Most studies examining the safety and efficacy of transphyseal anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction for skeletally immature patients utilize transtibial drilling. Independent femoral tunnel drilling may impart a different pattern of distal femoral physeal involvement.

Purpose:

To radiographically assess differences in distal femoral physeal disruption between transtibial and independent femoral tunnel drilling. We hypothesized that more oblique tunnels associated with independent drilling involve a significantly larger area of physeal disruption compared with vertically oriented tunnels.

Study Design:

Cross-sectional study; Level of evidence, 3.

Methods:

We analyzed skeletally immature patients aged between 10 and 15 years who underwent transphyseal ACL reconstruction utilizing an independent femoral tunnel drilling technique between January 1, 2008, and March 31, 2011. These patients were matched with a transtibial technique cohort based on age and sex. Radiographic measurements were recorded from preoperative magnetic resonance imaging and postoperative radiographs.

Results:

Ten patients in each group were analyzed. There were significant differences between independent drilling and transtibial drilling cohorts in the estimated area of physeal disruption (1.64 vs 0.74 cm²; P < .001), femoral tunnel angles (32.1° vs 72.8°; P < .001), and medial/lateral location of the femoral tunnel (24.2 vs 36.1 mm from lateral cortex; P = .001), respectively. There was a significant inverse correlation between femoral tunnel angle and estimated area of distal femoral physeal disruption (r = –0.8255, P = .003).

Conclusion:

Femoral tunnels created with an independent tunnel drilling technique disrupt a larger area of the distal femoral physis and create more eccentric tunnels compared with a transtibial technique.

Clinical Relevance:

As most studies noting the safety of transphyseal ACL reconstruction have utilized a central, vertical femoral tunnel, surgeons should be aware that if an independent femoral tunnel technique is utilized during transphyseal ACL reconstruction, more physeal tissue is at risk and tunnels are more eccentrically placed across the physis when drilling at more horizontal angles. Prior studies have shown that greater physeal involvement and eccentric tunnels may increase the risk of growth disturbance.

Comparison of Femoral Tunnel Length and Obliquity Between Transtibial, Anteromedial Portal, and Outside-In Surgical Techniques in Single-Bundle Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: A Meta-analysis

PURPOSE

It is unclear whether femoral tunnel length and obliquity differ after transtibial and independent femoral drilling techniques of anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction. This meta-analysis therefore compared femoral tunnel length and obliquity in patients who underwent ACL reconstruction by the transtibial, anteromedial (AM) portal, and outside-in (OI) techniques.

METHODS

In accordance with PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines, all studies comparing femoral tunnel length and obliquity with various measurement tools-from direct measurement to imaging methods such as plain radiography, computed tomography, or magnetic resonance imaging-in patients who underwent reconstruction by the transtibial or independent femoral drilling (AM portal or OI) techniques were included.

RESULTS

Fourteen studies were included in the meta-analysis. The femoral tunnel length was 7.8 to 11.0 mm longer (P < .05) and coronal obliquity was 7.5° to 29.1° more vertical (P < .05) with the transtibial technique than with the AM portal or OI technique. Femoral tunnel and graft obliquity in the sagittal plane, however, did not differ significantly (P > .05).

CONCLUSIONS

ACL reconstruction using the AM portal and OI femoral drilling techniques resulted in a shorter length and greater coronal obliquity of the femoral tunnel than did the transtibial technique. However, these 3 femoral drilling techniques resulted in similar obliquities of the femoral tunnel and graft in the sagittal plane.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III, meta-analysis.

Intraoperative Hoffa fracture during primary ACL reconstruction: can hamstring graft and tunnel diameter be too large?

Intraoperative fracture during tunnel placement in primary anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction is rarely reported. To our knowledge, this is the first case report of an intraoperative distal femoral coronal plane (Hoffa) fracture that occurred during independent femoral tunnel drilling and dilation in a primary ACL reconstruction. The patient was treated with open reduction and internal fixation, without compromise of graft stability and with good recovery of function. We discuss the potential ramifications of such a complication in the context of the current emphasis placed on large graft and femoral tunnel sizes.

Evaluation and Comparison of Femoral Tunnel Placement During Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction Using 3-Dimensional Computed Tomography: Effect of Notchplasty on Transtibial and Medial Portal Drilling

BACKGROUND

Advocates of medial portal drilling claim that the transtibial technique results in a more vertical positioning of the graft, which could lead to subsequent failure and/or a residual pivot shift on postoperative examination. However, advocates of transtibial drilling state that with appropriate placement and adequate notchplasty, their technique places the graft in a more anatomically correct position on the wall, negating the resultant potential for pivot shift and early postoperative failure.

HYPOTHESIS

Transtibial femoral drilling can adequately reproduce the femoral origin of the anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) and place the graft in an anatomical position equivalent to medial portal drilling.

STUDY DESIGN

Controlled laboratory study.

METHODS

Ten matched-pair cadaveric knees (N = 20) were scanned using computed tomography (CT), and 3-dimensional images of the native ACL origin were reconstructed. The matched pairs were then randomized into transtibial and medial portal groups. The femoral tunnel was drilled in each knee according to group. A bamboo skewer was placed in the femoral tunnel, and the knees underwent a second CT scan. Arthroscopic notchplasty was performed, and the femoral tunnels were redrilled. Radiographs confirmed placement, and the post-notchplasty tunnel was reamed with a 4-mm reamer. The knees underwent a third CT scan. CT scans compared femoral tunnel placement with the native ACL footprint before and after notchplasty.

RESULTS

The post-notchplasty transtibial group revealed an average of 68.3% coverage of the native ACL femoral origin. The medial portal group revealed an average of 60.8% coverage, with 1 instance of perforation of the posterior cortex. There were no instances of perforation in the transtibial group.

CONCLUSION

Both drilling techniques place the graft in an anatomically correct position.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Transtibial drilling of the femur can adequately place the entry tunnel at the origin of the ACL's native footprint.