3D CT evaluation of femoral and tibial tunnels in anatomic double bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction

Distribution of bone tunnel positions and treatment efficacy of bone landmark positioning method for anatomical reconstruction of the anterior cruciate ligament: a case control study

BACKGROUND

This study aimed to investigate the distribution of femoral tunnel and explore the influences of bone tunnel positions on knee functions. The bone landmark positioning method was used to position the femoral tunnel during the anatomical reconstruction surgery in patients with anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) rupture.

METHODS

Data of patients who underwent anatomical reconstruction of the ACL between January 2015 and July 2018, were retrospectively analyzed. The distribution of the femoral tunnel was recorded on 3-D CT after surgery. The tunnel positions were classified into good and poor position groups based on whether the position was in the normal range (24-37% on the x-axis and 28-43% on the y-axis). The Lysholm and IKDC scores, KT-1000 side-to-side difference, pivot shift test and Lachman test results of the knee joints were recorded, and then the differences in knee joint functions between the two groups were analyzed.

RESULTS

84 eligible patients (84 knees) were finally included in this study. Twenty-two and 62 of the patients were categorized in the good and poor position groups, respectively, and the rate of good position was 26.2%. The distribution of bone tunnel was as follows: (x-axis) deep position in 10 patients (12%), normal position in 58 patients (69%), and shallow position in 16 patients (19%); (y-axis) high position in 54 patients (64%), normal position in 26 patients (31%), and low position in 4 patients (5%). 1 year later, the Lysholm and IKDC scores were significantly better in the good position group (P < 0.05), the KT-1000 side to side difference, the pivot shift test and Lachman test results were better in the good position group (P < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

The bone tunnels were found to be distributed in and beyond the normal range using the bone landmark method to position the femoral tunnel in the single-bundle anatomical reconstruction of ACL, while the rate of good bone tunnel position was low. The knee joint function scores and stability were lower in patients with poor position of the femoral tunnel.

Anatomical double-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction moderately improved tegner scores over the long-term: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

PURPOSE

To assess the effects of anatomical double-bundle (DB) versus single-bundle (SB) for anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction in skeletally mature patients with ACL injuries.

METHODS

MEDLINE, EMBASE, and CENTRAL were searched from inception to February 7, 2022 were screened for randomized controlled trials. The Anatomic Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction Checklist was used to categorize studies as anatomic. A random-effects meta-analysis was conducted, with pooled results being summarized using mean difference (MD). Risk of Bias (RoB) was assessed using the RoB 2.0 tool. Certainty of evidence was rated using GRADE.

RESULTS

A search of 1371 unique articles yielded eight eligible trials, representing 735 patients (360 DB, 375 SB) with mean (SD) age of 28.5 (2.86) years and follow-up of 52.1 (36.2) months. Most trials had moderate to low RoB. Overall, DB was not significantly better than SB on Lysholm scores (MD = 0.52, 95% CI, - 1.80-2.85, p = 0.66; moderate certainty) or subjective International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) scores (MD = - 0.40, 95% CI, - 4.35-3.55, p = 0.84; moderate certainty). Tegner scores were significantly higher in SB than DB in the intermediate term (MD = - 0.72, 95% CI, - 1.10 to - 0.34, p = 0.0002; high certainty), while significantly higher in DB relative to SB in the long-term (MD = 0.52, 95% CI, 0.02-1.03, p = 0.04; high certainty).

CONCLUSION

DB ACL reconstruction significantly improves Tegner scores relative to SB ACL reconstruction over the long-term (t ≥ 5 years). Intermediate term Tegner scores favour SB reconstruction. In both durations, there was no clinically significant difference based on the pre-specified minimal clinically important difference of 1.0 point. There were also no significant differences in IKDC or Lysholm scores. Surgeons should consider anatomical DB ACL reconstruction as a result of long-term improvement in patient-reported outcomes.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

I.

Posteriorly positioned femoral grafts decrease long-term failure in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction, femoral and tibial graft positions did not affect long-term reported outcome

PURPOSE

To investigate the effect that femoral and tibial tunnel positions have on long-term reported and clinical outcome and to identify a safe zone based on favourable outcome.

METHODS

Seventy-eight patients from a previous randomised controlled trial were included and were followed with a mean follow-up of 11.4 years. All patients had primary trans-tibial anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction performed. The femoral and tibial tunnel positions were visualised and translated in percentages with three-dimensional computed tomography post-operatively. There were 3 separate outcome variables: patient-reported outcome measured with the IKDC Subjective Knee Form, overall failure, and radiographic osteoarthritis. The correlation between tunnel aperture positions and outcome was determined with multivariate regression. The area with best outcome was defined as the safe zone and was determined with Youden's index in conjunction with receiver operating characteristics.

RESULTS

No significant relationship was found between tunnel aperture positions and IKDC Subjective Knee Form at 10-year follow-up. The posterior-to-anterior femoral tunnel aperture position parallel to Blumensaat line showed a significant relationship (p = 0.03) to overall failure at 10-year follow-up. The mean posterior-to-anterior tunnel position of the group that did not fail was 37.7% compared to 44.1% in the overall failure group. Femoral tunnel apertures placed further anteriorly had more overall failures at long-term. The cut-off point lies at 35.0% from posterior-to-anterior parallel to Blumensaat. Of the 16 overall failures, 15 (93.8%) were placed further anteriorly than the cut-off point. No significant relationship was found between tunnel aperture positions and radiographic osteoarthritis.

CONCLUSION

Femoral and tibial tunnel positions were not associated with long-term patient-reported outcome and radiographic osteoarthritis. Long-term overall failure was more frequently seen in patients with a more anteriorly placed femoral tunnel. This study identified a safe zone located at the most posterior 35% of the femoral condyle parallel to Blumensaat. This knowledge offers guidance to surgeons to operate more precisely and accurately and reconstruct a long-lasting graft.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III.

Contemporary Principles for Postoperative Rehabilitation and Return to Sport for Athletes Undergoing Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction

Despite advancements in our understanding of anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injury prevention and nonsurgical management, ACL reconstruction continues to occur at an alarming rate. Among athletic patients, individuals participating in basketball, soccer, and football have the highest incidence of ACL injury, often requiring surgical intervention. To ensure the optimal treatment strategy for return to sport and prevention of secondary graft re-tear, it is important to tailor to the specific demands of the injured athlete and apply evidence-based best practices and rehabilitation principles. The purpose of this review is to provide readers with a brief background regarding ACL injuries, a focused review of clinical outcome studies after ACL reconstruction, and an updated framework with expert-guided recommendations for postoperative rehabilitation and return to sporting activity. Currently, there is no gold standard for rehabilitation after ACL reconstruction, highlighting the need for robust studies evaluating the best modalities for athlete rehabilitation, as well as determining the efficacy of new tools for improving therapy including blood flow restriction therapy and neuromuscular electrical stimulation. Based on clinical experience, a renewed focus on objective, criteria-based milestones may maximize the ability of return to preinjury levels of athletic function.