Femoral Graft Bending Angle and Femoral Tunnel Geometry of Transportal and Outside‐In Techniques in Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: An In Vivo 3‐Dimensional Computed Tomography Analysis
Authors:
- 1 November 2012
- journal article
- research article
- Published by Wiley in Arthroscopy
- Vol. 28 (11) , 1682-1694
Abstract
Purpose: To compare femoral graft bending angles and femoral tunnel geometries between the transportal (TP) and outside‐in (OI) techniques after anatomic double‐bundle (DB) anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction. Methods: Thirty‐nine patients underwent DB ACL reconstruction with the TP and OI techniques. They were randomized on the day of surgery to either the TP group (group I, 21 cases) or the OI group (group II, 18 cases). Femoral graft bending angle, femoral tunnel geometry, posterior wall breakage, and tunnel communication were assessed by computed tomography imaging with OsiriX imaging software (Pixmeo, Geneva, Switzerland). Results: The mean anteromedial (AM) and posterolateral (PL) femoral graft bending angles of group II (97.3° ± 8.3° and 97.4° ± 8.6°, respectively) were significantly more acute than those of group I (108.2° ± 8.4° and 109.9° ± 8.8°, respectively) ( P < .001). The mean AM femoral tunnel length of group II (34.3 ± 3.9 mm) was significantly longer than that of group I (31.9 ± 2.7 mm) ( P = .02). However, the mean PL femoral tunnel lengths did not differ between groups. In 7 cases—4 cases (19.0%) in group I and 3 cases (16.6%) in group II—the femoral tunnel communication was found around the intra‐articular aperture. Posterior wall breakage was observed in 5 cases (23.8%), which were all in AM femoral tunnels of group I. Conclusions: The OI technique resulted in more acute femoral graft bending angles (difference of 10.9° and 12.5° for AM and PL, respectively) and longer mean AM femoral tunnel lengths (difference of 2.4 mm) than the TP technique after anatomic DB ACL reconstruction, even though these small differences might be unlikely to be of clinical significance. Femoral tunnel communication was found in both groups, and posterior wall breakage was observed in AM femoral tunnels with the TP technique. Level of Evidence: Level I, prospective randomized trial.Keywords
This publication has 38 references indexed in Scilit:
- Anterior Cruciate Ligament Femoral Footprint Anatomy: Systematic Review of the 21st Century LiteratureArthroscopy, 2012
- Transtibial Versus Anteromedial Portal Reaming in Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: An Anatomic and Biomechanical Evaluation of Surgical TechniqueArthroscopy, 2010
- Evaluation of the Bone Bridge Between the Bone Tunnels After Anatomic Double-Bundle Anterior Cruciate Ligament ReconstructionThe American Journal of Sports Medicine, 2010
- Oblique Femoral Tunnel Placement Can Increase Risks of Short Femoral Tunnel and Cross-Pin Protrusion in Anterior Cruciate Ligament ReconstructionThe American Journal of Sports Medicine, 2010
- Independent Drilling of Tibial and Femoral Tunnels in Anterior Cruciate Ligament ReconstructionThe Journal of Knee Surgery, 2009
- Effect of Tunnel-Graft Length on the Biomechanics of Anterior Cruciate Ligament-Reconstructed KneesThe American Journal of Sports Medicine, 2008
- Tunnel Positioning of Anteromedial and Posterolateral Bundles in Anatomic Anterior Cruciate Ligament ReconstructionThe American Journal of Sports Medicine, 2007
- Morphology of Anterior Cruciate Ligament Attachments for Anatomic Reconstruction: A Cadaveric Dissection and Radiographic StudyArthroscopy, 2006
- Anatomic Arthroscopic Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction Using Bone–Patellar Tendon–Bone AutograftTechniques in Orthopaedics, 2005
- Second‐look arthroscopy of anterior cruciate ligament grafts with multistranded hamstring tendonsArthroscopy, 2004