Double-Bundle Reconstruction of the Anterior Cruciate Ligament Using the Transtibial Technique

We present an arthroscopic surgical procedure for double-bundle transtibial anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction with 2 tibial and femoral tunnels using autologous semitendinosus and gracilis tendons. The first aim is to attempt to create the femoral tunnels correctly through the tibial tunnels. To achieve this, a new tibial guide was used that permitted the simultaneous preparation of the anteromedial and posterolateral tibial tunnels. The intra-articular landmark is the tibial spine region, whereas the extra-articular landmarks are the anterior profile of the medial collateral ligament and the anterior tibial apophysis. We also describe transverse femoral fixation with biopins (1 for each femoral tunnel) after the preparation of the 2 tibial and femoral tunnels.     

Hybrid Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: Introduction of a New Technique for Anatomic Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction

Recently, anatomic or double-bundle reconstruction of the anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) has been presented in an effort to more accurately restore the native anatomy. These techniques create 2 tunnels in both the femur and tibia to reproduce the bundles of the ACL. However, the increased number of tunnels, particularly on the femoral side, has raised some concerns among authors and surgeons. We describe a technique to reconstruct the 2 distinct bundles of the ACL by using a single femoral tunnel and 2 tibial tunnels, the “hybrid” ACL reconstruction. The femoral tunnel is drilled through an anteromedial arthroscopy portal, which allows placement in a more anatomic position. Fixation in the femur is achieved with a novel device that separates a soft-tissue graft into 2 independently functioning bundles. Once fixed in the femur, the anteromedial and posterolateral bundles of the graft are passed through respective tunnels at the anatomic footprint on the tibia. These bundles are independently tensioned, which creates a reconconstruction that is similar to the native ACL. The technique presented provides surgeons with an alternative to other double-bundle techniques involving 4 tunnels.     

In Vivo Three-Dimensional Imaging Analysis of Femoral and Tibial Tunnel Locations in Single and Double Bundle Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstructions

Background

Anatomic footprint restoration of anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) is recommended during reconstruction surgery. The purpose of this study was to compare and analyze the femoral and tibial tunnel positions of transtibial single bundle (SB) and transportal double bundle (DB) ACL reconstruction using three-dimensional computed tomography (3D-CT).

Methods

In this study, 26 patients who underwent transtibial SB ACL reconstruction and 27 patients with transportal DB ACL reconstruction using hamstring autograft. 3D-CTs were taken within 1 week after the operation. The obtained digital images were then imported into the commercial package Geomagic Studio v10.0. The femoral tunnel positions were evaluated using the quadrant method. The mean, standard deviation, standard error, minimum, maximum, and 95% confidence interval values were determined for each measurement.

Results

The femoral tunnel for the SB technique was located 35.07% ± 5.33% in depth and 16.62% ± 4.99% in height. The anteromedial (AM) and posterolateral (PL) tunnel of DB technique was located 30.48% ± 5.02% in depth, 17.12% ± 5.84% in height and 34.76% ± 5.87% in depth, 45.55% ± 6.88% in height, respectively. The tibial tunnel with the SB technique was located 45.43% ± 4.81% from the anterior margin and 47.62% ± 2.51% from the medial tibial articular margin. The AM and PL tunnel of the DB technique was located 33.76% ± 7.83% from the anterior margin, 45.56% ± 2.71% from the medial tibial articular margin and 53.19% ± 3.74% from the anterior margin, 46.00% ± 2.48% from the medial tibial articular margin, respectively. The tibial tunnel position with the transtibial SB technique was located between the AM and PL tunnel positions formed with the transportal DB technique.

Conclusions

Using the 3D-CT measuring method, the location of the tibia tunnel was between the AM and PL footprints, but the center of the femoral tunnel was at more shallow position from the AM bundle footprint when ACL reconstruction was performed by the transtibial SB technique.     

ACL重建股骨隧道定位及固定方法研究

目的探讨关节镜下应用半腱肌、股薄肌肌腱重建膝前交叉韧带时股骨隧道定位及固定方法。方法经临床及膝关节镜检查诊断的膝前交叉韧带损伤者86例采取镜下修复,分别应用经由内向外及由外向内2种定位方法行股骨隧道定位;股骨隧道固定分别应用Endobutton、Rigidfix及可吸收挤压螺钉3种方法。结果经随访10～26个月,Lachman征、前抽屉试验均为阴性,Lysholm评分从28分到70分,平均56.65分。结论股骨端隧道由内向外定位方法（通过胫骨隧道）创伤略小,适用于Endobutton、Rigidfix等,但受胫骨隧道位置及角度影响,要使股骨端隧道定位点与前交叉韧带股骨外髁解剖止点完全吻合,必须建立精确位置及角度的胫骨隧道。而股骨端隧道由外向内定位方法创伤略大,适用于股骨端挤压螺钉固定,定位点不受胫骨隧道影响,与前交叉韧带股骨外髁解剖止点较易吻合;而各种股骨端固定方法各有利弊,选择最佳的股骨隧道及固定方法将有助于减少术后并发症。     

Supplemental Tibial Fixation for Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction

This report describes transosseous backup suture fixation for anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) grafts of all varieties, used to distally augment proximal screw fixation in the tibia. Using a simple suture configuration, this method secures the ACL graft to the tibial cortex in conjunction with a proximal interference screw. The technique is applicable for all graft configurations, including allograft, autograft, bone, and both 2- and 4-strand soft-tissue grafts. The described technique is intended to be used for secondary or backup fixation of the graft in the tibial tunnel and not as primary fixation. This construct can be reproducibly created, making use of the sutures that are typically present on the graft after the interference screw is placed. This technique for backup tibial fixation precludes the need for external hardware, which in many instances may be symptomatically proud. Furthermore, use of this technique may represent a potential cost savings because no additional devices or equipment is used or purchased. This technique is simple, fast, and inexpensive, making use of available constructs to enhance the security of graft fixation during ACL reconstruction.     

Anatomic Double-Bundle Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: Where Are We Today?

The anatomic approach to anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction has been a growing trend in orthopaedics. Progress made over the last 7 years has led to a greater understanding of the ACL anatomy and its 2 bundles. Surgeons are now more equipped to restore the native anatomy and knee kinematics than ever before. The University of Pittsburgh experience and technique have been described and have evolved to include several key principles. These include the restoration of native ACL anatomy, insertion sites, and double-bundle tension patterns with the utilization of an accessory medial portal to provide an individualized approach to ACL reconstruction. The purpose of this technical note is to provide surgeons with a technical update regarding the anatomic approach to ACL surgery. Most of this article will be focused on anatomic double-bundle ACL reconstruction, but it must be emphasized that this is a concept rather than just a technique and should be applied to all ACL reconstructions to provide a more anatomic and individualized result.     

Volume and Contact Surface Area Analysis of Bony Tunnels in Single and Double Bundle Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction Using Autograft Tendons: In Vivo Three-Dimensional Imaging Analysis

Background

Regarding reconstruction surgery of the anterior cruciate ligament (ACL), there is still a debate whether to perform a single bundle (SB) or double bundle (DB) reconstruction. The purpose of this study was to analyze and compare the volume and surface area of femoral and tibial tunnels during transtibial SB versus transportal DB ACL reconstruction.

Methods

A consecutive series of 26 patients who underwent trantibial SB ACL reconstruction and 27 patients with transportal DB ACL reconstruction using hamstring autograft from January 2010 to October 2010 were included in this study. Three-dimensional computed tomography (3D-CT) was taken within one week after operation. The CT bone images were segmented with use of Mimics software v14.0. The obtained digital images were then imported in the commercial package Geomagic Studio v10.0 and SketchUp Pro v8.0 for processing. The femoral and tibial tunnel lengths, diameters, volumes and surface areas were evaluated. A comparison between the two groups was performed using the independent-samples t-test. A p-value less than the significance value of 5% (p < 0.05) was considered statistically significant.

Results

Regarding femur tunnels, a significant difference was not found between the tunnel volume for SB technique (1,496.51 ± 396.72 mm³) and the total tunnel volume for DB technique (1,593.81 ± 469.42 mm³; p = 0.366). However, the total surface area for femoral tunnels was larger in DB technique (919.65 ± 201.79 mm²) compared to SB technique (810.02 ± 117.98 mm²; p = 0.004). For tibia tunnels, there was a significant difference between tunnel volume for the SB technique (2,070.43 ± 565.07 mm³) and the total tunnel volume for the DB technique (2,681.93 ± 668.09 mm³; p ≤ 0.001). The tibial tunnel surface area for the SB technique (958.84 ± 147.50 mm²) was smaller than the total tunnel surface area for the DB technique (1,493.31 ± 220.79 mm²; p ≤ 0.001).

Conclusions

Although the total femoral tunnel volume was similar between two techniques, the total surface area was larger in the DB technique. For the tibia, both total tunnel volume and the surface area were larger in DB technique.     

保残双束重建技术在军事训练致后交叉韧带损伤中的应用

目的 探讨保残双束重建技术治疗军事训练致后交叉韧带（posterior cruciate ligament,PCL）损伤的临床疗效。方法 回顾分析2018年12月至2020年12月北部战区总医院骨科收治的18例膝关节PCL损伤军人病例的临床资料,在膝关节镜下应用自体半腱肌腱、股薄肌腱联合腓骨长肌腱前半部分双束双隧道保残重建PCL。其中,男14例,年龄为（28.5±5.2）岁（18~40岁）;女4例,年龄为（21.5±4.5）岁（15~34岁）。PCL损伤均由于军事训练导致,国际膝关节文献委员会（IKDC）评分为（61.37±8.49）分,改良Lysholm膝关节评分为（62.20±5.67分）;膝关节活动度为95.83°±8.15°。结果 手术时间为（90.7±5.7）min（80~120 min）。术后切口均一期愈合。所有病例均获随访,随访时间为（12.0±1.0）个月。末次随访时,后抽屉试验阳性1例,反Lachman试验阳性1例。术后IKDC评分为（84.67±3.67）分,改良Lysholm评分为（90.37±4.49）,均显著优于术前,差异有统计学意义（P＜0.05）。术后1个月膝关节活动度为83.5°±8.7°,末次随访时为115.3°±11.4°,术后末次随访的临床数据与术前比较,差异存在统计学意义（P＜0.05）。术后MRI、三维CT复查示重建PCL形态及位置满意。结论 应用保残双束重建技术治疗军事训练致PCL损伤,疗效满意。     

Anteromedial Portal Technique for the Anterior Cruciate Ligament Femoral Socket: Pitfalls and Solutions

Creating the anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) femoral socket using the anteromedial (AM) portal technique has advantages. Furthermore, the technique is ideal for anatomic double-bundle (particularly posterolateral bundle) and all-inside ACL techniques. However, although the AM portal technique has advantages, the learning curve is steep when making the transition from familiar, transtibial reaming to the AM portal technique for ACL femoral tunnel creation. Complications and challenges are many when learning the AM portal technique. The purpose of this technical note is to describe tips and pearls for surgeons contemplating the transition to the AM portal technique for the ACL femoral socket.     

Evaluation of Femoral Tunnel Positioning Using 3-Dimensional Computed Tomography and Radiographs after Single Bundle Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction with Modified Transtibial Technique

Background

The purpose of this study is to report a modified transtibial technique to approach the center of anatomical femoral footprint in anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction and to investigate the accurate femoral tunnel position with 3-dimensional computed tomography (3D-CT) and radiography after reconstruction.

Methods

From December 2010 to October 2011, we evaluated 98 patients who underwent primary ACL reconstruction using a modified transtibial technique to approach the center of anatomical femoral footprint in single bundle ACL reconstruction with hamstring autograft. Their femoral tunnel positions were investigated with 3D-CT and radiography postoperatively. Femoral tunnel angle was measured on the postoperative anteroposterior (AP) radiograph and the center of the femoral tunnel aperture on the lateral femoral condyle was assessed with 3D-CT according to the quadrant method by two orthopedic surgeons.

Results

According to the quadrant method with 3D-CT, the femoral tunnel was measured at a mean of 32.94% ± 5.16% from the proximal condylar surface (parallel to the Blumensaat line) and 41.89% ± 5.58% from the notch roof (perpendicular to the Blumensaat line) with good interobserver (intraclass correlation coefficients [ICC], 0.766 and 0.793, respectively) and intraobserver reliability (ICC, 0.875 and 0.893, respectively). According to the radiographic measurement on the AP view, the femoral tunnel angles averaged 50.43° ± 7.04° (ICC, 0.783 and 0.911, respectively).

Conclusions

Our modified transtibial technique is anticipated to provide more anatomical placement of the femoral tunnel during ACL reconstruction than the former traditional transtibial techniques.