Clinical outcome of anatomic double-bundle ACL reconstruction and 3D CT model-based validation of femoral socket aperture position
- 547 Downloads
The purpose of this study was to evaluate the clinical results of anatomic double-bundle (DB) anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction in which anatomic position of femoral socket apertures was validated using three-dimensional (3D) computed tomography (CT) modelling.
Anatomic DB ACL reconstructions with hamstring autografts were performed in 34 patients. Two femoral sockets were created through a far anteromedial (AM) portal behind the lateral intercondylar ridge with the assistance of intraoperative 3D fluoroscopic navigation. Femoral tunnel aperture positioning was investigated postoperatively using 3D CT images in all patients. Clinical results were also evaluated subjectively and objectively at least up to 2 years.
Measurement of the AM and the posterolateral (PL) femoral socket locations on the 3D CT images using the quadrant method showed that the centre of the AM socket aperture was located at a depth of 21.0 ± 4.1 % and a height of 30.5 ± 9.3 % and that of the PL socket aperture was located at a depth of 31.3 ± 5.8 % and a height of 57.2 ± 7.7 %. The femoral socket locations were considered as anatomic in accordance with previous cadaveric studies examining the positions of ACL femoral insertion site. Subjectively, the mean Lysholm score was 96.9 ± 4.0 points. According to IKDC final objective scores, 26 knees (76 %) were objectively graded as normal, 8 (24 %) as nearly normal, and 0 (0 %) as abnormal or severely abnormal. Postoperative side-to-side anterior translation measured with a KT-2000 arthrometer averaged 0.7 ± 1.2 mm.
DB ACL reconstructions in which femoral socket apertures were validated anatomically using 3D CT provided satisfactory short-term results.
Level of evidence
Case series, Level IV.
KeywordsNavigation Femoral tunnel Anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction Three-dimensional computed tomography Double-bundle Anatomic
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
- 6.Bird JH, Carmont MR, Dhillon M, Smith N, Brown C, Thompson P, Spalding T (2011) Validation of a new technique to determine midbundle femoral tunnel position in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction using 3-dimensional computed tomography analysis. Arthroscopy 27:1259–1267PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 11.Forsythe B, Kopf S, Wong A, Martins C, Anderst W, Tashman S, Fu F (2010) The location of femoral and tibial tunnels in anatomic double-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction analyzed by three-dimensional computed tomography models. J Bone Joint Surg Am 92:1418–1426PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 18.Kawakami Y, Hiranaka T, Matsumoto T, Hida Y, Fukui T, Uemoto H, Doita M, Tsuji M, Kurosaka M, Kuroda R (2012) The accuracy of bone tunnel position using fluoroscopic-based navigation system in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 20:1503–1510PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 34.Taketomi S, Nakagawa T, Takeda H, Nakajima K, Nakayama S, Fukai A, Hirota J, Kachi Y, Kawano H, Miura T, Fukui N, Nakamura K (2011) Anatomical placement of double femoral tunnels in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: anteromedial tunnel first or posterolateral tunnel first? Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 19:424–431PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar