Abstract
Purpose
To further elucidate the direct and indirect fibre insertion morphology within the human ACL femoral attachment using scanning electron microscopy and determine where in the footprint each fibre type predominates. The hypothesis was that direct fibre attachment would be found centrally in the insertion site, while indirect fibre attachment would be found posteriorly adjacent to the posterior articular cartilage.
Methods
Ten cadaveric knees were dissected to preserve and isolate the entirety of the femoral insertion of the ACL. Specimens were then prepared and evaluated with scanning electron microscopy to determine insertional fibre morphology and location.
Results
The entirety of the fan-like projection of the ACL attachment site lay posterior to the lateral intercondylar ridge. In all specimens, a four-phase architecture, consistent with previous descriptions of direct fibres, was found in the centre of the femoral attachment site. The posterior margin of the ACL attachment attached directly adjacent to the posterior articular cartilage with some fibres coursing into it. The posterior portion of the ACL insertion had a two-phase insertion, consistent with previous descriptions of indirect fibres. The transition from the ligament fibres to bone had less interdigitations, and the interdigitations were significantly smaller (p < 0.001) compared to the transition in the direct fibre area. The interdigitations of the direct fibres were 387 ± 81 μm (range 282–515 μm) wide, while the interdigitations of indirect fibres measured 228 ± 75 μm (range 89–331 μm).
Conclusions
The centre of the ACL femoral attachment consisted of a direct fibre structure, while the posterior portion had an indirect fibre structure. These results support previous animal studies reporting that the centre of the ACL femoral insertion was comprised of the strongest reported fibre type. Clinically, the femoral ACL reconstruction tunnel should be oriented to cover the entirety of the central direct ACL fibres and may need to be customized based on graft type and the fixation device used during surgery.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Dave LY, Nyland J, Caborn DN (2012) Knee flexion angle is more important than guidewire type in preventing posterior femoral cortex blowout: a cadaveric study. Arthroscopy 28(10):1381–1387
Fernandes TL, Fregni F, Weaver K, Pedrinelli A, Camanho GL, Hernandez AJ (2014) The influence of femoral tunnel position in single-bundle ACL reconstruction on functional outcomes and return to sports. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 22(1):97–103
Gao J, Messner K (1996) Quantitative comparison of soft tissue-bone interface at chondral ligament insertions in the rabbit knee joint. J Anat 188(Pt 2):367–373
Iwahashi T, Shino K, Nakata K, Otsubo H, Suzuki T, Amano H, Nakamura N (2010) Direct anterior cruciate ligament insertion to the femur assessed by histology and 3-dimensional volume-rendered computed tomography. Arthroscopy 26(9 Suppl):S13–S20
Kawaguchi Y, Kondo E, Takeda R, Akita K, Yasuda K, Amis AA (2015) The role of fibers in the femoral attachment of the anterior cruciate ligament in resisting tibial displacement. Arthroscopy 31(3):435–444
Kopf S, Pombo MW, Szczodry M, Irrgang JJ, Fu FH (2011) Size variability of the human anterior cruciate ligament insertion sites. Am J Sports Med 39(1):108–113
Musahl V, Plakseychuk A, VanScyoc A, Sasaki T, Debski RE, McMahon PJ, Fu FH (2005) Varying femoral tunnels between the anatomical footprint and isometric positions: effect on kinematics of the anterior cruciate ligament-reconstructed knee. Am J Sports Med 33(5):712–718
Noh JH, Roh YH, Yang BG, Yi SR, Lee SY (2013) Femoral tunnel position on conventional magnetic resonance imaging after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction in young men: transtibial technique versus anteromedial portal technique. Arthroscopy 29(5):882–890
Pathare NP, Nicholas SJ, Colbrunn R, McHugh MP (2014) Kinematic analysis of the indirect femoral insertion of the anterior cruciate ligament: implications for anatomic femoral tunnel placement. Arthroscopy 30(11):1430–1438
Robert HE, Bouguennec N, Vogeli D, Berton E, Bowen M (2013) Coverage of the anterior cruciate ligament femoral footprint using 3 different approaches in single-bundle reconstruction: a cadaveric study analyzed by 3-dimensional computed tomography. Am J Sports Med 41(10):2375–2383
Robin BN, Jani SS, Marvil SC, Reid JB, Schillhammer CK, Lubowitz JH (2015) Advantages and disadvantages of transtibial, anteromedial portal, and outside-in femoral tunnel drilling in single-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a systematic review. Arthroscopy 31(7):1412–1417
Sasaki N, Ishibashi Y, Tsuda E, Yamamoto Y, Maeda S, Mizukami H, Toh S, Yagihashi S, Tonosaki Y (2012) The femoral insertion of the anterior cruciate ligament: discrepancy between macroscopic and histological observations. Arthroscopy 28(8):1135–1146
Siebold R (2011) The concept of complete footprint restoration with guidelines for single- and double-bundle ACL reconstruction. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 19(5):699–706
van der List JP, Zuiderbaan HA, Nawabi DH, Pearle AD (2015) Impingement following anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: comparing the direct versus indirect femoral tunnel position. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. doi:10.1007/s00167-015-3897-9
Villegas DF, Haut Donahue TL (2010) Collagen morphology in human meniscal attachments: a SEM study. Connect Tissue Res 51(5):327–336
Zantop T, Diermann N, Schumacher T, Schanz S, Fu FH, Petersen W (2008) Anatomical and nonanatomical double-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: importance of femoral tunnel location on knee kinematics. Am J Sports Med 36(4):678–685
Zhao L, Thambyah A, Broom ND (2014) A multi-scale structural study of the porcine anterior cruciate ligament tibial enthesis. J Anat 224(6):624–633
Ziegler CG, Pietrini SD, Westerhaus BD, Anderson CJ, Wijdicks CA, Johansen S, Engebretsen L, LaPrade RF (2011) Arthroscopically pertinent landmarks for tunnel positioning in single-bundle and double-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstructions. Am J Sports Med 39(4):743–752
Acknowledgments
This work was sponsored by Steadman Philippon Research Institute, Vail, Colorado.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Investigation performed at the Department of Biomedical Engineering, Steadman Philippon Research Institute, Vail, Colorado, and the Soft Tissue Mechanics Laboratory, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, Colorado.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Moulton, S.G., Steineman, B.D., Haut Donahue, T.L. et al. Direct versus indirect ACL femoral attachment fibres and their implications on ACL graft placement. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 25, 165–171 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00167-016-4188-9
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00167-016-4188-9