Bone-to-bone integrations were complete within 5 months after anatomical rectangular tunnel anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction using a bone–patellar tendon–bone graft

  • Hironari Masuda
  • Shuji Taketomi
  • Hiroshi Inui
  • Naoya Shimazaki
  • Nobuhiro Nishihara
  • Seikai Toyooka
  • Hirotaka Kawano
  • Takumi Nakagawa
Knee
  • 12 Downloads

Abstract

Purpose

Anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction using a bone–patellar tendon–bone (BTB) graft is known to provide secure fixation due to the direct bone-to-bone integration of the bone plug and bone tunnel. It is important to know the time required for bone integration when designing the postoperative rehabilitation protocol or deciding when the patient can return to competition-level activity, especially if the patient is an athlete. However, because reports are scarce, the period necessary for bone-to-bone integration after ACL reconstruction using a BTB graft remains unclear. The purpose of this study was to clarify this issue. It was hypothesised that ACL reconstruction using a BTB graft via an anatomical rectangular tunnel would help in the integration between bone plugs and bone tunnels on both the femoral and tibial sides after at least 6 months, at which point basic exercises similar to pre-injury sporting activity levels can be resumed.

Methods

This study included 40 knees treated with ACL reconstruction using a BTB graft via anatomical rectangular tunnel reconstruction between 2013 and 2014 in a single institute. The integration between bone plugs and bone tunnels was evaluated using multi-slice tomosynthesis, which is a technique for producing slice images using conventional radiographic systems, at 1, 3, and 5 months postoperatively. All procedures were performed by two experienced surgeons. Bone integration was evaluated by two orthopaedic doctors.

Results

The rates of integration of the bone plug and femoral bone tunnel on tomosynthesis at 1, 3, and 5 months postoperatively were 0, 55, and 100%, respectively. On the tibial side, the corresponding rates were 0, 75, and 100%, respectively. The rate of integration on the tibial side was significantly higher than that on the femoral side at 3 months postoperatively (p = 0.031).

Conclusions

Bone-to-bone integration on the femoral and tibial sides was complete within 5 months after surgery in all cases. Since the time required for bone integration is important in designing the postoperative rehabilitation approach, these results will serve as a useful guideline for planning rehabilitation protocols.

Level of evidence

IV.

Keywords

ACL reconstruction Anatomical rectangular tunnel Bone–patellar tendon–bone graft EndoButton 

Abbreviations

ACL

Anterior cruciate ligament

BTB

Bone–patellar tendon–bone graft

DSP

Double spiked plate

CT

Computed tomography

Notes

Author contribution statement

HM and TN made substantial contributions to conception and design, acquisition of data, analysis and interpretation of data, and drafting the manuscript or revising it critically for important intellectual content. ST, HI, NS, NN, and ST agreed to be accountable for all aspects of the work in ensuring that questions related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work are appropriately investigated and resolved. HK gave final approval of the version to be published. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Ethical approval

The institutional review board of Teikyo University in Tokyo, Japan approved this study (ID17036).

Informed consent

All patients were informed about the procedure and provided consent for participation in the study and for the publication of their data.

References

  1. 1.
    Becker AS, Martini K, Higashigaito K, Guggenberger R, Andreisek G, Frauenfelder T (2017) Dose reduction in tomosynthesis of the wrist. AJR Am J Roentgenol 208:159–164CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Cavanaugh JT, Powers M (2017) ACL rehabilitation progression: where are we now? Curr Rev Musculoskelet Med 10:289–296CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Colombet P, Bouguennec N (2017) Suspensory fixation device for use with bone–patellar tendon–bone grafts. Arthrosc Tech 6:e833–e838CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Drogset JO, Grøntvedt T, Myhr G (2006) Magnetic resonance imaging analysis of bioabsorbable interference screws used for fixation of bone–patellar tendon–bone autografts in endoscopic reconstruction of the anterior cruciate ligament. Am J Sports Med 34:1164–1169CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Fink C, Benedetto KP, Hackl W, Hoser C, Freund MC, Rieger M (2000) Bioabsorbable polyglyconate interference screw fixation in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a prospective computed tomography-controlled study. Arthroscopy 16:491–498CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Gazaille RE, Flynn MJ, Page W, Finley S, van Holsbeeck M (2011) Technical innovation: digital tomosynthesis of the hip following intra-articular administration of contrast. Skelet Radiol 40:1467–1471CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Gomi T, Hirano H (2008) Clinical potential of digital linear tomosynthesis imaging of total joint arthroplasty. J Digit Imaging 21:312–322CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Goradia VK, Rochat MC, Grana WA, Rohrer MD, Prasad HS (2000) Tendon-to-bone healing of a semitendinosus tendon autograft used for ACL reconstruction in a sheep model. Am J Knee Surg 13:143–151PubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Grassi A, Nitri M, Moulton SG, Marcheggiani Muccioli GM, Bondi A, Romagnoli M et al (2017) Does the type of graft affect the outcome of revision anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction? A meta-analysis of 32 studies. Bone Jt J 99-B:714–723CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Grassman SR, McDonald DB, Thornton GM, Shrive NG, Frank CB (2002) Early healing processes of free tendon grafts within bone tunnels is bone-specific: a morphological study in a rabbit model. Knee 9:21–26CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Höher J, Möller HD, Fu FH (1998) Bone tunnel enlargement after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: fact or fiction? Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 6:231–240CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Ha AS, Lee AY, Hippe DS, Chou SH, Chew FS (2015) Digital tomosynthesis to evaluate fracture healing: prospective comparison with radiography and CT. AJR Am J Roentgenol 205:136–141CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Hayashi H, Kurosaka D, Saito M, Ikeda R, Kijima E, Yamashita Y et al (2017) Anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction with bone–patellar tendon–bone graft through a rectangular bone tunnel made with a rectangular retro-dilator: an operative technique. Arthrosc Tech 6:e1057–e1062CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Jones KG (1963) Reconstruction of the anterior cruciate ligament. A technique using the central one-third of the patellar ligament. J Bone Jt Surg Am 45:925–932CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Kawakami H, Shino K, Hamada M, Nakata K, Nakagawa S, Nakamura N et al (2004) Graft healing in a bone tunnel: bone-attached graft with screw fixation versus bone-free graft with extra-articular suture fixation. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 12:384–390CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Lipscomb AB, Johnston RK, Snyder RB, Warburton MJ, Gilbert PP (1982) Evaluation of hamstring strength following use of semitendinosus and gracilis tendons to reconstruct the anterior cruciate ligament. Am J Sports Med 10:340–342CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Lomasney LM, Tonino PM, Coan MR (2007) Evaluation of bone incorporation of patellar tendon autografts and allografts for ACL reconstruction using CT. Orthopedics 30:152–157PubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Lui P, Zhang P, Chan K, Qin L (2010) Biology and augmentation of tendon–bone insertion repair. J Orthop Surg Res 5:59CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Machida H, Yuhara T, Sabol JM, Tamura M, Shimada Y, Ueno E (2011) Postoperative follow-up of olecranon fracture by digital tomosynthesis radiography. Jpn J Radiol 29:583–586CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Mae T, Shino K, Iuchi R, Kinugasa K, Uchida R, Nakagawa S et al (2017) Biomechanical characteristics of the anatomic rectangular tunnel anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction with a bone–patellar tendon–bone graft. J Orthop Sci 22:886–891CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Martini K, Becker AS, Guggenberger R, Andreisek G, Frauenfelder T (2016) Value of tomosynthesis for lesion evaluation of small joints in osteoarthritic hands using the OARSI score. Osteoarthr Cartil 24:1167–1171CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Mascarenhas R, Tranovich MJ, Kropf EJ, Fu FH, Harner CD (2012) Bone–patellar tendon–bone autograft versus hamstring autograft anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction in the young athlete: a retrospective matched analysis with 2–10 year follow-up. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 20:1520–1527CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Noël A, Ottenin MA, Germain C, Soler M, Villani N, Vilani N et al (2011) Comparison of irradiation for tomosynthesis and CT of the wrist. J Radiol 92:32–39CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Nye DD, Mitchell WR, Liu W, Ostrander RV (2017) Biomechanical comparison of fixed-loop and adjustable-loop cortical suspensory devices for metaphyseal femoral-sided soft tissue graft fixation in anatomic anterior cruciate Ligament reconstruction using a porcine model. Arthroscopy 33:1225–1232 (e1221) CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Rodeo SA, Arnoczky SP, Torzilli PA, Hidaka C, Warren RF (1993) Tendon-healing in a bone tunnel. A biomechanical and histological study in the dog. J Bone Jt Surg Am 75:1795–1803CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Samuelsen BT, Webster KE, Johnson NR, Hewett TE, Krych AJ (2017) Hamstring autograft versus patellar tendon autograft for ACL reconstruction: is there a difference in graft failure rate? A meta-analysis of 47,613 patients. Clin Orthop Relat Res 475:2459–2468CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Shino K, Mae T, Tachibana Y (2015) Anatomic ACL reconstruction: rectangular tunnel/bone–patellar tendon–bone or triple-bundle/semitendinosus tendon grafting. J Orthop Sci 20:457–468CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Shino K, Nakata K, Nakamura N, Toritsuka Y, Horibe S, Nakagawa S et al (2008) Rectangular tunnel double-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction with bone–patellar tendon–bone graft to mimic natural fiber arrangement. Arthroscopy 24:1178–1183CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Shino K, Nakata K, Nakamura N, Toritsuka Y, Nakagawa S, Horibe S (2005) Anatomically oriented anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction with a bone–patellar tendon–bone graft via rectangular socket and tunnel: a snug-fit and impingement-free grafting technique. Arthroscopy 21:1402CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Suzuki T, Shino K, Nakagawa S, Nakata K, Iwahashi T, Kinugasa K et al (2011) Early integration of a bone plug in the femoral tunnel in rectangular tunnel ACL reconstruction with a bone–patellar tendon–bone graft: a prospective computed tomography analysis. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 19(Suppl 1):S29–S35CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Taketomi S, Inui H, Nakamura K, Yamagami R, Tahara K, Sanada T et al (2015) Secure fixation of femoral bone plug with a suspensory button in anatomical anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction with bone–patellar tendon–bone graft. Joints 3:102–108CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Taketomi S, Inui H, Tahara K, Shirakawa N, Tanaka S, Nakagawa T (2017) Effects of initial graft tension on femoral tunnel widening after anatomic anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction using a bone–patellar tendon–bone graft. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 137:1285–1291CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Taketomi S, Inui H, Yamagami R, Shirakawa N, Kawaguchi K, Nakagawa T et al. (2017) Bone–patellar tendon–bone autograft versus hamstring tendon autograft for anatomical anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction with three-dimensional validation of femoral and tibial tunnel positions. J Knee Surg.  https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0037-1615813 PubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Thompson SM, Salmon LJ, Waller A, Linklater J, Roe JP, Pinczewski LA (2016) Twenty-year outcome of a longitudinal prospective evaluation of isolated endoscopic anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction with patellar tendon or hamstring autograft. Am J Sports Med 44:3083–3094CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Thrush C, Porter TJ, Devitt BM (2018) No evidence for the most appropriate postoperative rehabilitation protocol following anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction with concomitant articular cartilage lesions: a systematic review. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00167-018-4882-x PubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Weiler A, Hoffmann RF, Bail HJ, Rehm O, Südkamp NP (2002) Tendon healing in a bone tunnel. Part II: histologic analysis after biodegradable interference fit fixation in a model of anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction in sheep. Arthroscopy 18:124–135CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Weiler A, Peine R, Pashmineh-Azar A, Abel C, Südkamp NP, Hoffmann RF (2002) Tendon healing in a bone tunnel. Part I: biomechanical results after biodegradable interference fit fixation in a model of anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction in sheep. Arthroscopy 18:113–123CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Xie X, Liu X, Chen Z, Yu Y, Peng S, Li Q (2015) A meta-analysis of bone–patellar tendon–bone autograft versus four-strand hamstring tendon autograft for anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Knee 22:100–110CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Yoshiya S, Nagano M, Kurosaka M, Muratsu H, Mizuno K (2000) Graft healing in the bone tunnel in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Clin Orthop Relat Res 376:278–286CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© European Society of Sports Traumatology, Knee Surgery, Arthroscopy (ESSKA) 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Hironari Masuda
    • 1
  • Shuji Taketomi
    • 2
  • Hiroshi Inui
    • 2
  • Naoya Shimazaki
    • 3
  • Nobuhiro Nishihara
    • 1
  • Seikai Toyooka
    • 1
  • Hirotaka Kawano
    • 1
  • Takumi Nakagawa
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Orthopaedic SurgeryTeikyo UniversityTokyoJapan
  2. 2.Department of Orthopaedic SurgeryTokyo UniversityTokyoJapan
  3. 3.Shimazaki HospitalIbarakiJapan

Personalised recommendations