The forces in the anterior cruciate ligament and knee kinematics during a simulated pivot shift test: A human cadaveric study using robotic technology

Purpose: Although it is well known that the anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) is a primary restraint of the knee under anterior tibial load, the role of the ACL in resisting internal tibial torque and the pivot shift test is controversial. The objective of this study was to determine the effect of these 2 external loading conditions on the kinematics of the intact and ACL-deficient knee and the in situ force in the ACL. Type of Study: This study was a biomechanical study that used cadaveric knees with the intact knee of the specimen serving as a control. Materials and Methods: Twelve human cadaveric knees were tested using a robotic/universal force-moment sensor testing system. This system applied (1) a 10–Newton meter (Nm) internal tibial torque and (2) a combined 10-Nm valgus and 10-Nm internal tibial torque (simulated pivot shift test) to the intact and the ACL-deficient knee. Results: In the ACL-deficient knee, the isolated internal tibial torque significantly increased coupled anterior tibial translation over that of the intact knee by 94%, 48%, and 19% at full extension, 15°, and 30° of flexion, respectively (P <.05). In the case of the simulated pivot shift test, there were similar increases in anterior tibial translation, i.e., 103%, 61%, and 32%, respectively (P <.05). Furthermore, the anterior tibial translation under the simulated pivot shift test was significantly greater than under an isolated internal tibial torque (P <.05). Under the simulated pivot shift test, the in situ forces in the ACL were 83 ± 16 N at full extension and 93 ± 23 N at 15° of knee flexion. These forces were also significantly higher when compared with those for an isolated internal tibial torque (P <.05). Conclusion: Our data indicate that the ACL plays an important role in restraining coupled anterior tibial translation in response to the simulated pivot shift test as well as under an isolated internal tibial torque, especially when the knee is near extension. These findings are also consistent with the clinical observation of anterior tibial subluxation during the pivot shift test with the knee near extension.Arthroscopy: The Journal of Arthroscopic and Related surgery, Vol 16, No 6 (September), 2000: pp 633–639     

A quantitative analysis of valgus torque on the ACL: a human cadaveric study.

The loads needed to elicit a positive pivot shift test in a knee with an anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) rupture have not been quantified. The coupled anterior tibial translation (ATT), coupled internal tibial rotation (ITR), and the in situ force in the ACL in response to a valgus torque, an inherent component of the pivot shift test, were measured in 10 human cadaveric knee specimens. Using a robotic/universal force-moment sensor testing system, valgus torques ranging from 0.0 to 10.0 Nm were applied in nine increments on the intact and ACL-deficient knee in flexion ranging from 0 degrees to 90 degrees. At 15 degrees of knee flexion, the coupled ATT and ITR were significantly increased in the ACL-deficient knee when compared to the intact knee. Coupled ATT increased a maximum of 291% (6.7 mm, p<0.05), while coupled ITR increased a maximum of 85% (5.1 degrees, p<0.05). At 30 degrees, the increases in coupled ATT and ITR were significant at valgus loads of 3.3 Nm and greater with a maximum increase in coupled ATT of 137% (6.3 mm, p<0.05) and a maximum increase in coupled ITR of 38% (3.6 degrees, p<0.05). At 45 degrees, coupled ATT increased significantly (maximum of 69%, 4.4 mm, p<0.05), but only at torques > or =6.7 Nm. The in situ force in the ACL was less than 20 N for all flexion angles when a torque between 3.3 and 5.0 Nm was applied. Low valgus torque elicited tibial subluxation in the ACL-deficient knee with low in situ ACL forces, similar to a positive pivot shift test. Thus, application of a valgus torque may be suitable to evaluate ACL-deficient and ACL-reconstructed knees, since subluxation can be achieved with minimal harm to the ACL graft. This work is important in understanding one load component needed for the pivot shift examination; further studies quantifying other load components are essential for better comprehension of the in vivo pivot shift examination.     

Robotically Simulated Pivot Shift That Represents the Clinical Exam

A thorough understanding of anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) function and the effects of surgical interventions on knee biomechanics requires robust technologies and simulation paradigms that align with clinical insight. In vitro orthopedic biomechanical testing for the elucidation of ACL integrity doesn't have an established testing paradigm to simulate the clinical pivot shift exam on cadaveric specimens. The study aim was to develop a robotically simulated pivot shift that represents the clinical exam. An orthopedic surgeon performed a pivot shift on an instrumented ACL‐deficient cadaver leg to capture 6 degree‐of‐freedom motion/loads. The same knee was mounted to the robot and the sensitivity of the motion/loading profiles quantified. Three loading profile candidates that generated positive pivot shifts on the instrumented knee were selected and applied to 7 ACL‐intact/deficient specimens and resulted in the identification of a profile that was able to induce a positive pivot shift in all ACL‐deficient specimens ( p < 0.001). The simulated shifts began at 22 ± 8° and ended at 33 ± 6° of flexion with the average magnitude of the shifts being 12.8 ± 3.2 mm in anterior tibial translation and 17.6 ± 4.3° in external tibial rotation. The establishment and replication of a robotically simulated clinical pivot shift across multiple specimens show the robustness of the loading profile to accommodate anatomical and experimental variability. Further evaluation and refinement should be undertaken to create a useful tool in evaluating ACL function and reconstruction techniques. Statement of clinical significance: Creation and successful demonstration of the simulated clinical pivot shift validates a profile for robotic musculoskeletal simulators to analyze ACL related clinical questions. © 2019 Orthopaedic Research Society. Published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Orthop Res 37:2601–2608, 2019     

Double bundle revision of a malplaced single bundle vertical ACL reconstruction: ACL revision surgery using a two femoral tunnel technique

Background  Several factors influence the outcome after ACL reconstruction. One of the most important factors influencing the resulting knee kinematics and subjective instability is femoral tunnel placement. Revision can be necessary if the femoral tunnel is drilled transtibial in the roof of femoral notch (mismatch). Hypothesis  Double bundle reconstruction using two femoral tunnels and one tibial tunnel technique can be used in revision of a primary vertical ACL reconstruction. Study design  Case series (level of evidence III). Methods  ACL revision was performed in five patients complaining instability after primary transtibial ACL reconstruction. Clinical examination, X-ray and CT analysis were performed to evaluate objective knee laxity, tunnel placement and widening. In all patients a technique using two femoral tunnels in a two medial portal technique and one tibial tunnel was used. Patients were reevaluated at a follow up of 24 months. Results  Preoperatively, pivot shift tests were 2+ in three and 1+ in the remaining two patients. Lachman test was found to be positive in all patients (4 patients, 2+ firm endpoint; 1 patient, 2+ soft endpoint). X-rays showed a femoral tunnel position at 11.30 (1 patient) and 12.00 o’clock (4 patients). In one patient significant tibial tunnel enlargement was to be found. At a follow up of 24 months, KT 1000 was <2 mm side to side difference and the pivot shift test was negative in all patients. Conclusion  Revision of a primary vertical ACL reconstruction can be safely performed using a double bundle reconstruction with two femoral tunnels in a two medial portal technique and one tibial tunnel technique. The femoral tunnel need to be located in the anatomic origin of the AM and PL bundle. Clinical relevance  Femoral tunnel placement in the notch of the intercondylar notch should be avoided. In these cases without significant tunnel enlargement, a primary double bundle revision with two femoral and one tibial tunnel can be performed.     

Comparison of the ACL and ACL graft forces before and after ACL reconstruction an in-vitro robotic investigation

Background?Long-term follow-up studies have indi-cated that there is an increased incidence of arthrosis following anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruc-tion, suggesting that the reconstruction may not repro-duce intact ACL biomechanics. We studied not only the magnitude but also the orientation of the ACL and ACL graft forces

Methods?10 knee specimens were tested on a robotic testing system with the ACL intact, deficient, and recon-structed (using a bone-patella tendon-bone graft). The magnitude and orientation of the ACL and ACL graft forces were determined under an anterior tibial load of 130?N at full extension, and 15, 30, 60, and 90° of flexion. Orientation was described using elevation angle (the angle formed with the tibial plateau in the sagit-tal plane) and deviation angle (the angle formed with respect to the anteroposterior direction in the transverse plane)

Results?ACL reconstruction restored anterior tibial translation to within 2.6?mm of that of the intact knee under the 130-N anterior load. Average internal tibial rotation was reduced after ACL reconstruction at all flexion angles. The force vector of the ACL graft was significantly different from the ACL force vector. The average values of the elevation and deviation angles of the ACL graft forces were higher than that of the intact ACL at all flexion angles

Interpretation?Contemporary single bundle ACL reconstruction restores anterior tibial translation under anterior tibial load with different forces (both magni-tude and orientation) in the graft compared to the intact ACL. Such graft function might alter knee kinematics in other degrees of freedom and could overly constrain the tibial rotation. An anatomic ACL reconstruction should reproduce the magnitude and orientation of the intact ACL force vector, so that the 6-degrees-of-freedom knee kinematics and joint reaction forces can be restored.     

Comparison of the ACL and ACL graft forces before and after ACL reconstruction: an in-vitro robotic investigation

Background Long-term follow-up studies have indi-cated that there is an increased incidence of arthrosis following anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruc-tion, suggesting that the reconstruction may not repro-duce intact ACL biomechanics. We studied not only the magnitude but also the orientation of the ACL and ACL graft forces

Methods 10 knee specimens were tested on a robotic testing system with the ACL intact, deficient, and recon-structed (using a bone-patella tendon-bone graft). The magnitude and orientation of the ACL and ACL graft forces were determined under an anterior tibial load of 130 N at full extension, and 15, 30, 60, and 90° of flexion. Orientation was described using elevation angle (the angle formed with the tibial plateau in the sagit-tal plane) and deviation angle (the angle formed with respect to the anteroposterior direction in the transverse plane)

Results ACL reconstruction restored anterior tibial translation to within 2.6 mm of that of the intact knee under the 130-N anterior load. Average internal tibial rotation was reduced after ACL reconstruction at all flexion angles. The force vector of the ACL graft was significantly different from the ACL force vector. The average values of the elevation and deviation angles of the ACL graft forces were higher than that of the intact ACL at all flexion angles

Interpretation Contemporary single bundle ACL reconstruction restores anterior tibial translation under anterior tibial load with different forces (both magni-tude and orientation) in the graft compared to the intact ACL. Such graft function might alter knee kinematics in other degrees of freedom and could overly constrain the tibial rotation. An anatomic ACL reconstruction should reproduce the magnitude and orientation of the intact ACL force vector, so that the 6-degrees-of-freedom knee kinematics and joint reaction forces can be restored.     

Anterolateral Ligament of the Knee: Diagnosis,Indications, Technique,Outcomes

In the context of anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction surgery, anterolateral ligament reconstruction is now recognized as a reliable option to control rotatory instability and should be considered in the knee surgeon's modern armamentarium. By highlighting its daily practical application, this infographic presents the indications for this specific additional lateral augmentation, the anatomic and biomechanical principles that underline its rationale, and the clinical outcomes from recent large series.In 2013, Claes et al. updated the anterolateral ligament (ALL) concept, and numerous subsequent studies detailed its precise anatomy. It is now accepted that the femoral insertion is located proximal and posterior to the epicondyle. The biomechanical behavior of the ALL during the knee flexion path has been reported to provide control of tibial internal rotation during the pivot shift and with increasing knee flexion angles (>35). Clinically, when a patient presents with an anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injury, clinical examination (pivot shift test), radiography (Segond fracture), ultrasound, and 3-dimensional magnetic resonance imaging are useful to assess a combined ALL injury.The following indications for ALL reconstruction are now well established: ACL revision, high-grade pivot shift test, chronic ACL rupture, young patients, pivoting activities, and patients undergoing medial meniscus repair. It has been reported that anatomic and minimally invasive surgical techniques that control anterolateral rotatory instability can achieve successful outcomes without specific complications. Finally, the addition of ALL reconstruction does not delay postoperative rehabilitation, and no modification is required for an early rehabilitation protocol.     

Anatomical versus Non-Anatomical Single Bundle Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: A Cadaveric Study of Comparison of Knee Stability

Background

The purpose of this study was to compare the initial stability of anatomical and non-anatomical single bundle anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction and to determine which would better restore intact knee kinematics. Our hypothesis was that the initial stability of anatomical single bundle ACL reconstruction would be superior to that of non-anatomical single bundle ACL reconstruction.

Methods

Anterior tibial translation (ATT) and internal rotation of the tibia were measured with a computer navigation system in seven pairs of fresh-frozen cadaveric knees under two testing conditions (manual maximum anterior force, and a manual maximum anterior force combined with an internal rotational force). Tests were performed at 0, 30, 60, and 90 degrees of flexion with the ACL intact, the ACL transected, and after reconstruction of one side of a pair with either anatomical or non-anatomical single bundle ACL reconstruction.

Results

Under manual maximal anterior force, both reconstruction techniques showed no significant difference of ATT when compared to ACL intact knee state at 30° of knee flexion (p > 0.05). Under the combined anterior and internal rotatory force, non-anatomical single-bundle ACL reconstruction showed significant difference of ATT compared to those in ACL intact group (p < 0.05). In contrast, central anatomical single bundle ACL reconstruction showed no significant difference of ATT compared to those in ACL intact group (p > 0.05). Internal rotation of the tibia showed no significant difference in the ACL intact, the ACL transected, non-anatomical reconstructed and anatomical reconstructed knees.

Conclusions

Anatomical single bundle ACL reconstruction restored the initial stability closer to the native ACL under combined anterior and internal rotational forces when compared to non-anatomical ACL single bundle reconstruction.     

The contribution of each anterior cruciate ligament bundle to the Lachman test: a cadaver investigation

The clinical diagnosis of a partial tear of the anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) is still subject to debate. Little is known about the contribution of each ACL bundle during the Lachman test. We investigated this using six fresh-frozen cadaveric lower limbs. Screws were placed in the femora and tibiae as fixed landmarks for digitisation of the bone positions. The femur was secured horizontally in a clamp. A metal hook was screwed to the tibial tubercle and used to apply a load of 150?N directed anteroposteriorly to the tibia to simulate the Lachman test. The knees then received constant axial compression and 3D knee kinematic data were collected by digitising the screw head positions in 30° flexion under each test condition. Measurements of tibial translation and rotation were made, first with the ACL intact, then after sequential cutting of the ACL bundles, and finally after complete division of the ACL. Two-way analysis of variance analysis was performed. During the Lachman test, in all knees and in all test conditions, lateral tibial translation exceeded that on the medial side. With an intact ACL, both anterior and lateral tibial landmarks translated significantly more than those on the medial side (p < 0.001). With sequential division of the ACL bundles, selective cutting of the posterolateral bundle (PLB) did not increase translation of any landmark compared with when the ACL remained intact. Cutting the anteromedial bundle (AMB) resulted in an increased anterior translation of all landmarks. Compared to the intact ACL, when the ACL was fully transected a significant increase in anterior translation of all landmarks occurred (p < 0.001). However, anterior tibial translation was almost identical after AMB or complete ACL division. We found that the AMB confers its most significant contribution to tibial translation during the Lachman test, whereas the PLB has a negligible effect on anterior translation. Section of the PLB had a greater effect on increasing the internal rotation of the tibia than the AMB. However, its contribution of a mean of 2.8° amplitude remains low. The clinical relevance of our investigation suggests that, based on anterior tibial translation only, one cannot distinguish between a full ACL and an isolated AMB tear. Isolated PLB tears cannot be detected solely by the Lachman test, as this bundle probably contributes more resistance to the pivot shift.     

Incidence and mechanism of the pivot shift. An in vitro study.

The aim of this study was to determine the incidence and mechanism of the pivot shift phenomenon in the normal and anterior cruciate ligament transected knee in vitro. Fifteen knees were tested under a range of valgus moments and iliotibial tract tensions when intact and after anterior cruciate ligament transection. Knee kinematics were measured and described in terms of tibial rotation as the knee flexed. Eight knees pivoted after anterior cruciate ligament transection. The mean pivot shift motion was an external tibial rotation of 17 degrees (+/- 11 degrees standard deviation) over a range of 27 degrees (+/- 24 degrees) knee flexion, at a mean flexion angle of 56 degrees (+/- 27 degrees). Clinically, this corresponds to a reduction of an anteriorly subluxed lateral tibial plateau as the knee flexes. When intact, pivoting and nonpivoting knees had similar anteroposterior laxity, but after anterior cruciate ligament transection, the pivoting group had significantly greater laxity. The loading required to elicit the pivot shift was critical and variable between knees, which raises questions about comparing clinicians' techniques and results in assessing the buckling instability attributable to anterior cruciate ligament injury.     

The effects of ACL deficiency on mediolateral translation and varus-valgus rotation

Background The anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) constrains the anterior translation and axial rotation of the tibia. However, the effect of ACL injury on the mediolateral translation and varus-valgus rotation of the tibia is unknown. Because of the oblique orientation of the ACL, we hypothesized that ACL deficiency alters mediolateral translation and varus-valgus rotation.

Methods The kinematics of 9 cadavers from full extension to 90° of flexion under various loading conditions were measured before and after ACL resection using a robotic testing system.

Results ACL deficiency increased the medial translation of the tibia and valgus rotation, especially at 15° and 30° of flexion. For example, at 15°, ACL deficiency increased the medial translation from 1.2 (SD 0.9) mm to 1.8 (SD 1.1) mm in response to a quadriceps load. The valgus rotation also increased from 0.8° (SD 0.6) to 1.7° (SD 0.8).

Interpretation ACL deficiency altered both the mediolateral tibial translation and valgus-varus rotation under various loading conditions. The increased medial tibial translation could shift the contact in the medial compartment towards the medial tibial spine, a region where degeneration is observed in ACL-deficient patients. In addition to restoring anterior laxity, ACL reconstruction might need to restore the mediolateral translation of the tibia and varus-valgus rotation of the knee.     

Reconstruction of the anterior cruciate ligament: a clinical comparison of bone-patellar tendon-bone single bundle versus semitendinosus and gracilis double bundle technique

The study hypothesis was that the outcome of semitendinosus gracilis double bundle (STG-DB) anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction is advantageous in terms of clinical results and restoration of anterior-posterior and rotational laxity in comparison to bone-patellar tendon-bone single-bundle (PTB-SB) ACL reconstruction. We analysed 41 PTB-SB and 51 STG-DB patients using the Tegner, IKDC and WOMAC scores preoperatively and at a minimum follow-up of two years. At follow-up, there was no significant difference in the clinical scores. The KT 1000 side-to-side measurement showed no significant difference between groups. The STG-DB group was significantly superior in terms of the pivot-shift sign and anterior knee pain. We conclude that the outcome of STG-DB reconstruction in the mid-term was not advantageous in terms of clinical scores and anterior-posterior laxity evaluated by the KT 1000. Nevertheless, the restored rotational laxity measured by the pivot shift test was significantly superior in the STG-DB technique.     

Combined Anterior Cruciate Ligament and Lateral Extra-Articular Reconstruction

The anterolateral complex (ALC) of the knee has received renewed research interest because of the potential role of this anatomic region in anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) tear biomechanics and surgical treatment outcomes. The primary structures of the ALC include the iliotibial band deep (Kaplan) fibers, the anterolateral ligament (ALL), and the capsulo-osseous layer (COL) of the iliotibial band, although there remains disagreement on the precise anatomic locations and biomechanical relevance of these structures. Sectioning studies in the ACL-deficient knee have revealed a contribution of the ALC in restraining tibial internal rotation and anterior translation. Biomechanical studies have revealed a potential role for lateral extra-articular reconstruction as an augmentation to ACL reconstruction in knees with combined ACL and ALC sectioning. Clinical studies have reported a reduced ACL reconstruction failure rate with both ALL reconstruction and lateral extra-articular tenodesis procedures.     

Arthroscopic anatomical double bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: A prospective longitudinal study

Background:

Single bundle anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction has been the current standard of treatment for ACL deficiency. However, a significant subset of patients continue to report residual symptoms of instability with a poor pivot control. Cadaveric biomechanical studies have shown double bundle (DB) ACL reconstructions to restore the knee kinematics better. This study evaluates the outcome of DB ACL reconstruction.

Materials and Methods:

30 consecutive patients who underwent anatomic DB ACL reconstruction were included in this prospective longitudinal study. There were all males with a mean age of 25 ± 7.45 years. All patients were prospectively evaluated using GeNouRoB (GNRB) arthrometer, functional knee scores (International Knee Documentation Committee [IKDC] and Lysholm) and postoperative magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) for comparing the graft orientation and footprint of the reconstructed ACL with that of the normal knee.

Results:

The average followup was 36.2 months. At the time of final followup the mean Lysholm score was 93.13 ± 3.31. As per the objective IKDC score, 26 patients (86.6%) were in Group A while 4 patients (13.3%) were in Group B. The mean differential anterior tibial translation by GNRB, arthrometer was 1.07 ± 0.8 mm (range 0.1-2.3 mm). All cases had a negative pivot shift test. MRI scans of operated and the contralateral normal knee showed the mean sagittal ACL tibial angle coronal ACL tibial angle and tibial ACL footprint to be in accordance with the values of the contralateral, normal knee.

Conclusion:

The study demonstrates that DB ACL reconstruction restores the ACL anatomically in terms of size and angle of orientation. However, long term studies are needed to further substantiate its role in decreasing the incidence of early osteoarthritic changes compared to the conventional single bundle reconstructions.     

Effects of the tibial tunnel position on knee joint stability and meniscal contact pressure after double-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction

BackgroundTo investigate the effect of the tibial tunnel position on knee stability and the maximum contact area and peak contact pressure on the menisci after double-bundle anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction.MethodsTen human knee specimens (mean age: 74.1 ± 15.8 years) were used in this study. The anterior tibial loading test was conducted using a material testing machine at 30°, 60°, and 90° of knee flexion, with the anterior tibial translation (ATT) and the maximum contact area and peak contact pressure on the menisci measured. Outcome measures were compared between the following groups: 1) intact ACL (intact group); 2) anatomical tibial tunnel position (anatomical group) and 3) posterior tibial tunnel position (posterior group) with double-bundle reconstruction, and 4) ACL-deficient (deficient group).ResultsIn response to a 100 N anterior tibial load, the ATT was greater for the posterior and ACL-deficient groups compared to that in the intact group. The normalized maximum contact area of the medial meniscus significantly decreased for the posterior group compared to that in the intact group. The normalized peak contact pressure on the medial meniscus increased in all groups compared to that in the intact group, but with no between-group differences in pressure applied to the lateral meniscus.ConclusionsATT and contact pressure on the medial meniscus increased, concomitant with a decrease in contact area of the medial meniscus, as the position of the tibial tunnel position moved towards a posterior position.     

Review article: anatomic double bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction

The anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) consists of 2 bundles: a slightly larger anteromedial bundle and a posterolateral bundle, named according to their relative tibial insertion sites. Both bundles are crucial to knee stability. Although it is more technically demanding, a double bundle ACL reconstruction restores the knee biomechanics better and provides more rotational stability than a single bundle ACL reconstruction. Intermediate and long-term clinical investigation including the measurement of rotational laxity and the evaluation of osteoarthritic change is needed to confirm biomechanical and short-term clinical outcomes.     

Arthroscopic anatomic double bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: Our experience with follow-up of 4 years

BackgroundDouble bundle (DB) anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction has been proposed to recreate the natural anatomy of ACL. Reconstruction of the anatomy of both the bundles of ACL has been thought to be able to restore the rotational stability of the knee joint. Nevertheless, it remains unclear whether DB reconstruction has better functional outcome than single bundle (SB) ACL reconstruction.PurposeTo evaluate the clinical outcomes, patient satisfaction and manual laxity tests of knee in patients treated with DB ACL reconstruction in Indian population.MethodsWe prospectively followed 25 patients with an isolated ACL injury operated for DB ACL reconstruction after applying the inclusion and exclusion criteria. Patients were evaluated pre-operatively and in the post-operative period at regular intervals with the minimum follow up of 4 years. Clinical stability was assessed by anterior drawer test, Lachman test and pivot shift test. Functional outcome was assessed by IKDC, Lysholm and Modified Cincinnati scores.ResultsAt the end of 4 years, functional outcome in terms of all subjective scores was satisfactory. Graded stability results of the Lachman, Anterior drawer and pivot shift tests were almost near to that in normal knee. No complication occurred post-operatively.ConclusionAnatomical DB ACL reconstruction seems to offer satisfactory results in terms of subjective scores and stability tests to patients with ACL tear. It has been found to be associated with no obvious complications and no failures. However a larger patient pool is desired for conclusive results.     

Anatomic endoscopic anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction with patella tendon autograft

Current tibial endoscopic ACL reconstruction techniques provide functional stability, but fall short of the ultimate goal of ACL reconstruction, to restore normal knee kinematics. Vertical graft placement results in restoration of normal anteroposterior stability with a negative Lachman exam, but may not produce a stable knee in rotation, noted by a positive pivot shift. The Clancy anatomic endoscopic ACL reconstruction technique utilizes flexible reamers to achieve anatomic graft placement to more closely reproduce normal knee function. The overall results of arthroscopic anatomic endoscopic ACL reconstruction are essentially the same as we have reported using our previous open and rear-entry, two-incision techniques for anatomic graft placement. The long-term benefits of a more physiologic single incision endoscopic ACL reconstruction are not yet determined; however, short-term results are encouraging.     

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

BackgroundAn anatomical double bundle ACL reconstruction replicates the anatomy of native ACL as the tunnels are made to simulate the anatomy of ACL with AM and PL bundle foot prints. The goal of anatomic ACL reconstruction is to tailor the procedure to each patient’s anatomic, biomechanical and functional demands to provide the best possible outcome. The shift from single bundle to double bundle technique and also from transtibial to transportal method has been to provide near anatomic tunnel positions.PurposeTo determine the position of femoral and tibial tunnels prepared by double bundle ACL reconstruction using three dimensional Computed tomography.Study designA prospective case series involving forty patients with ACL tear who underwent transportal double bundle ACL reconstruction.MethodComputed tomography scans were performed on forty knees that had undergone double bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Three-dimensional computed tomography reconstruction models of the knee joint were prepared and aligned into an anatomical coordinate axis system for femur and tibia respectively. Tibial tunnel centres were measured in the anterior-to-posterior and medial-to-lateral directions on the top view of tibial plateau and femoral tunnel centres were measured in posterior to anterior and proximal-to-distal directions with anatomic coordinate axis method. These measurements were compared with published reference data.ResultsAnalysing the Femoral tunnel, the mean posterior-to-anterior distances for anteromedial and posterolateral tunnel centre position were 46.8% ± 7.4% and 34.5% ± 5.0% of the posterior-to-anterior height of the medial wall and the mean proximal-to-distal distances for the anteromedial and posterolateral tunnel centre position were 24.1% ± 7.1% and 61.6% ± 4.8%. On the tibial side, the mean anterior-to-posterior distances for the anteromedial and posterolateral tunnel centre position were 28.8% ± 4.3% and 46.2% ± 3.6% of the anterior-to posterior depth of the tibia measured from the anterior border and the mean medial-to-lateral distances for the anteromedial and posterolateral tunnel centre position were 46.5% ± 2.9% and 50.6% ± 2.8% of the medial-to-lateral width of the tibia measured from the medial border. There is high Inter-observer and Intra-observer reliability (Intra-class correlation coefficient).Discussion and conclusionFemoral AM tunnel was positioned significantly anterior and nearly proximal whereas the femoral PL tunnel was positioned significantly anterior and nearly distal with respect to the anatomic site. Location of tibial AM tunnel was nearly posterior and nearly medial whereas the location of tibial PL tunnel was very similar to the anatomic site Evaluation of location of tunnels through the anatomic co-ordinate axes method on 3D CT models is a reliable and reproducible method. This method would help the surgeons to aim for anatomic placement of the tunnels. It also shows that there is scope for improvement of femoral tunnel in double bundle ACL reconstruction through transportal technique.     

Double-bundle reconstruction cannot restore intact knee kinematics in the ACL/LCL-deficient knee

Introduction  

The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of single-bundle (SB) and anatomic double-bundle (DB) anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction on the resulting knee kinematics in a simulated clinical setting with ACL rupture and associated extra-articular damage to the lateral structures. It was hypothesized that anatomic DB ACL reconstruction restores the intact knee kinematics in ACL/LCL-deficient knees, whereas SB ACL reconstruction fails to restore the intact knee kinematics.