Tunnel position and graft orientation in failed anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a clinical and imaging analysis
- 371 Downloads
It has been reported that technical error in positioning the graft tunnel is the most common problem in anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction. The objective of this study was to quantitatively evaluate femoral and tibial tunnel positions and intra-articular graft orientation of primary ACL reconstruction in patients who had undergone revision ACL reconstruction. We postulated that this patient cohort had a nonanatomically positioned tunnel and graft orientation.
Twenty-six patients who had undergone a revision ACL were investigated. Clinical magnetic resonance (MR) images prior to revision were analysed. Three-dimensional models of bones and tunnels on the femur and tibia were created. Intra-articular graft orientation was measured in axial, sagittal and coronal planes. Graft positions were measured on the tibial plateau as a percentage from anterior to posterior and medial to lateral; graft positions on the femur were measured using the quadrant method.
Sagittal elevation angle for failed ACL reconstruction graft (69.6° ± 13.4°) was significantly greater (p < 0.05) than that of the native anteromedial (AM) and posterolateral (PL) bundles of the ACL (AM 56.2° ± 6.1°, PL 55.5° ± 8.1°). In the transverse plane, the deviation angle of the failed graft (37.3° ± 21.0°) was significantly greater than native ACL bundles. The tibial tunnel in this patient cohort was placed posteromedially and medially to the anatomical AM and PL bundles, respectively. The femoral tunnel was placed anteriorly to the anatomical AM and PL bundles.
This study reveals that both the tibial and femoral tunnel positions and consequently the intra-articular graft orientation in this patient group with failed ACL reconstruction were nonanatomical when compared with native ACL values. The results can be used to improve tunnel placement in ACL reconstruction.
KeywordsAnterior Cruciate Ligament Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction Femoral Tunnel Tibial Tunnel Tunnel Position
The authors thank Dr. Bijoy Thomas, Dr. Michael Kozanek, and Mr. Hemanth Gadikota for their technical assistance. This study was supported by National Institute of Health (5R01AR055612-04 and F32 AR056451).
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
- 17.Li G, Moses JM, Papannagari R, Pathare NP, DeFrate LE, Gill TJ (2006) Anterior cruciate ligament deficiency alters the in vivo motion of the tibiofemoral cartilage contact points in both the anteroposterior and mediolateral directions. J Bone Joint Surg Am 88(8):1826–1834PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 26.Forsythe B, Kopf S, Wong AK, Martins CA, Anderst W, Tashman S, Fu FH (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(6):1418–1426PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 28.Loh JC, Fukuda Y, Tsuda E, Steadman RJ, Fu FH, Woo SL (2003) Knee stability and graft function following anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: Comparison between 11 o'clock and 10 o'clock femoral tunnel placement. 2002 Richard O'Connor Award paper. Arthroscopy 19(3):297–304PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 35.Kopf S, Forsythe B, Wong AK, Tashman S, Anderst W, Irrgang JJ, Fu FH (2010) Nonanatomic tunnel position in traditional transtibial single-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction evaluated by three-dimensional computed tomography. J Bone Joint Surg Am 92(6):1427–1431PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 36.Abebe ES, Moorman CT 3rd, Dziedzic TS, Spritzer CE, Cothran RL, Taylor DC, Garrett WE Jr, DeFrate LE (2009) Femoral tunnel placement during anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: an in vivo imaging analysis comparing transtibial and 2-incision tibial tunnel-independent techniques. Am J Sports Med 37(10):1904–1911PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar