Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Does radiological evaluation of endobutton positioning in the sagittal plane affect clinical functional results in single-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction?

  • Arthroscopy and Sports Medicine
  • Published:
Archives of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Introduction

Sports injuries are increasing today due to the increased interest in sports. The most common injured knee ligament is the anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) in sport injuries. Accordingly, surgical treatment of the ACL is performed frequently. In this study, it was aimed to retrospectively evaluate whether the location of an endobutton on lateral knee radiography was effective on knee functional scores in patients who underwent ACL reconstruction.

Materials and methods

One hundred thirty patients who underwent ACL reconstruction between January 2015 and February 2019 were identified. The patients were divided into three groups according to the location of the endobutton on lateral radiographs taken in the postoperative period. Group 1 patients were classified as anterior, group 2 as middle, and group 3 as posterior according to the location of the endobutton. Functional scoring, physical examination tests, comparative thigh diameter measurements, and single-leg hop tests were compared between the groups. It was evaluated as to whether there was a statistically significant difference between the groups.

Results

There were 38 patients in group 1, 63 patients in group 2, and 29 patients in group 3. The mean age was 29.1 in group 1, 29.1 in group 2, and 29.7 in group 3. The mean follow-up period of the patients was 18.4 months in group 1, 19.1 months in group 2, and 21.4 months in group 3. The average Lysholm score was 92.9 in group 1, 93.3 in group 2, and 91.7 in group 3. The mean modified Cincinnati scores were 27.0, 27.1, and 26.6, respectively, in the groups. The mean IKDC score of the subjective knee assessments was 92.5, 92.8, and 91, respectively, according to the groups. The average thigh atrophy value was 1 cm, 1 cm, and 1.2 cm, respectively, in the groups. In the single-leg hop test, 34 patients in group 1 jump to over 85% of the distance compared with the intact side, while 58 patients in group 2, and 23 patients in group 3 were successfully able to jump this distance. The effect of the placement of the endobutton in the anterior, middle or posterior was not statistically significant on functional scores and physical examination results. In patients with endobuttons in the middle, functional scores were found better than in those with anterior or posterior placement.

Conclusions

No statistically significant differences were found in clinical functional results when comparing patients’ endobutton location on femur. For this reason, surgical time should not be extended using unnecessary extra effort to change the orientation of the exit hole during surgery.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Riboh JC, Hasselblad V, Godin JA, Mather RC 3rd (2013) Transtibial versus independent drilling techniques for anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a systematic review, meta-analysis, and meta-regression. Am J Sports Med 41:2693–2702. https://doi.org/10.1177/0363546513506979

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Tomohiko M, Tatsuo M, Konsei S, Keisuke K, Yuta T, Kazuomi S, Hideki Y, Ken N (2014) Tibiofemoral relationship following anatomic triple-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Knee Surg Sports TraumatolArthrosc 22:2128–2135. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00167-013-2646-1

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Grassi A, Carulli C, Innocenti M, Mosca M, Zaffagnini S, Bait C, SIGASCOT Arthroscopy Committee (2018) New trends in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a systematic review of national surveys of the last 5 years. Joints 6:177–187. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0038-1672157

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  4. Hulet C, Sonnery-Cottet B, Stevenson C, Samuelsson K, Laver L, Zdanowicz U, Stufkens S, Curado J, Verdonk P, Spalding T (2019) The use of allograft tendons in primary ACL reconstruction. Knee Surg Sports TraumatolArthrosc 27:1754–1770. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00167-019-05440-3

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Kilinc BE, Kara A, Oc Y, Celik H, Camur S, Bilgin E, Erten YT, Sahinkaya T, Eren OT (2016) Transtibial vs anatomical single bundle technique for anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a retrospective cohort study. Int J Surg 29:62–69. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijsu.2016.03.025

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Geeslin AG (2019) Editorial commentary: all-inside anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: in pursuit of ideal graft fixation. Arthroscopy 35:919–920. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arthro.2018.12.007

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Piefer JW, Pflugner TR, Hwang MD, Lubowitz JH (2012) Anterior cruciate ligament femoral footprint anatomy: systematic review of the 21st century literature. Arthroscopy 28:872–881. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arthro.2011.11.026

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Kim YK, Yoo JD, Kim SW, Park SH, Cho JH, Lim HM (2018) Intraoperative graft isometry in anatomic single-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Knee SurgRelat Res 30:115–120. https://doi.org/10.5792/ksrr.16.077

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Kim YM, Joo YB, Lee KY, Hwang SJ (2018) Femoral footprint for anatomical single-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a cadaveric study. Knee SurgRelat Res 30:128–132. https://doi.org/10.5792/ksrr.17.057

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Azboy I, Demirtas A, Gem M, Kiran S, Alemdar C, Bulut M (2014) A comparison of the anteromedial and transtibial drilling technique in ACL reconstruction after a short-term follow-up. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 134:963–969. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00402-014-1996-6

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Rothrauff BB, Jorge A, de Sa D, Kay J, Fu FH, Musahl V (2019) Anatomic ACL reconstruction reduces risk of post-traumatic osteoarthritis: a systematic review with minimum 10-year follow-up. Knee Surg Sports TraumatolArthrosc 28:1072–1084. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00167-019-05665-2

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Harilainen A, Sandelin J (2011) Revision anterior cruciate ligament surgery. A review of the literature and results of our own revisions. Scand J Med Sci Sports 11:163–169 (PMID:11374430)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Allen CR, Giffin JR, Harner CD (2003) Revision anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. OrthopClin N Am 34:79–98. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0030-5898(02)00066-4

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Liu A, Sun M, Ma C, Chen Y, Xue X, Guo P et al (2017) Clinical outcomes of transtibial versus anteromedial drilling techniques to prepare the femoral tunnel during anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Knee Surg Sports TraumatolArthrosc 25:2751–2759. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00167-015-3672-y

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Seo SS, Kim CW, Lee CR, Park DH, Kwon YU, Kim OG, Kim CK (2020) Intraoperative fluoroscopy reduces the variability in femoral tunnel placement during single bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Knee Surg Sports TraumatolArthrosc 28:629–636. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00167-019-05791-x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Marchant MH Jr, Willimon SC, Vinson E, Pietrobon R, Garrett WE, Higgins LD (2010) Comparison of plain radiography, computed tomography, and magnetic resonance imaging in the evaluation of bone tunnel widening after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Knee Surg Sports TraumatolArthrosc 18:1059–1064. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00167-009-0952-4

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Moloney G, Araujo P, Rabuck S, Carey R, Rincon G, Zhang X, Harner C (2013) Use of a fluoroscopic overlay to assist arthroscopic anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Am J Sports Med 41:1794–1800. https://doi.org/10.1177/0363546513490657

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Zhu M, Li S, Su Z, Zhou X, Peng P, Li J, Wang J, Lin L (2018) Tibial tunnel placement in anatomic anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a comparison study of outcomes between patient specific drill template versus conventional arthroscopic techniques. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 138(4):515–525. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00402-018-2880-6

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Debnath A, Raman R, Banka PK, Kumar S, Debnath H (2019) Radiological evaluation of tunnel position in single bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction in the Indian population and their clinical correlation. J ClinOrthop Trauma 10:586–592. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcot.2018.10.003

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Dutt S, Kumar V (2020) A comparative study of anatomical single-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction using femoral offset aimer versus freehand technique for femoral tunnel preparation. Eur J OrthopSurgTraumatol 30:493–499. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00590-019-02595-0

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Meuffels DE, Potters JW, Koning AH, Brown CH Jr, VJA, Reijman M, (2011) Visualization of postoperative anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction bone tunnels: reliability of standard radiographs, CT scans, and 3D virtual reality images. ActaOrthop 82:699–703. https://doi.org/10.3109/17453674.2011.623566

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Ji G, Han A, Hao X, Li N, Xu R, Wang F (2018) Better rotational control but similar outcomes with the outside-in versus the transtibial drilling technique for anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a systematic review of comparative trials. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 138(11):1575–1581. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00402-018-2976-z

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Vaishya R, Agarwal AK, Ingole S, Vijay V (2015) Current trends in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a review timing of surgery. Cureus 7:387. https://doi.org/10.7759/cureus.378

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Yau WP, Fok AW, Yee DK (2013) Tunnel positions in transportal versus transtibial anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a case-control magnetic resonance imaging study. Arthroscopy 29:1047–1052. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arthro.2013.02.010

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Minguell J, Nuñez JH, Reverte-Vinaixa MM, Sallent A, Gargallo-Margarit A, Castellet E (2019) Femoral tunnel position in chronic anterior cruciate ligament rupture reconstruction: randomized controlled trial comparing anatomic, biomechanical and clinical outcomes. Eur J OrthopSurgTraumatol 29:1501–1509. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00590-019-02455-x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Chechik O, Amar E, Khashan M, Lador R, Eyal G, Gold A (2013) An international survey on anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction practices. IntOrthop 37:201–206. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00264-012-1611-9

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Sven S, Maurice B, Hoeher J, Marc B (2015) Variability of tunnel positioning in fluoroscopic-assisted ACL reconstruction. Knee Surg Sports TraumatolArthrosc 23:2269–2277. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00167-014-3029-y

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Hoser C, Tecklenburg K, Kuenzel KH, Fink C (2005) Postoperative evaluation of femoral tunnel position in ACL reconstruction: plain radiography versus computed tomography. Knee Surg Sports TraumatolArthrosc 13:256–262. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00167-004-0548-y

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Moon HS, Choi CH, Jung M, Lee DY, Chang H, Kim SH (2019) Do rotation and measurement methods affect reliability of anterior cruciate ligament tunnel position on 3D reconstructed computed tomography? Orthop J Sports Med 7:1–11. https://doi.org/10.1177/2325967119885882

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

Authors declare that there is no conflict of interest or funding for this study. For this study, Ethics Committee approval dated 26/12/2019 and numbered 2019/233/12/08 was obtained from the Ethics Committee of Tekirdag Namık Kemal University Faculty of Medicine. Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Orthopaedics and Traumatology Department, Tekirdag Namik Kemal University Medical Faculty, Namik Kemal District Kampus Street 1/14, 59100, Süleymanpasa, Tekirdag, Turkey

    Burak Gunaydin, Mehmet Umit Cetin, Abdulkadir Sari, Yasar Mahsut Dincel, Rustem Varol & Nurettin Heybeli

  2. Orthopaedics and Traumatology Department, Istanbul Sisli Kolan International Hospital, Kaptanpasa District, Darulaceza Street Number: 14 Okmeydanı, Sisli, İstanbul, Turkey

    Cem Sever

  3. Orthopaedics and Traumatology Department, Kocaeli Private Gebze Central Hospital, Guzeller District, Yeni Bagdat Street, Number: 583, 41400, Gebze, Kocaeli, Turkey

    Burak Sener

Authors
  1. Burak Gunaydin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Cem Sever
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Mehmet Umit Cetin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Abdulkadir Sari
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Yasar Mahsut Dincel
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Burak Sener
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Rustem Varol
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Nurettin Heybeli
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Burak Gunaydin.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Gunaydin, B., Sever, C., Cetin, M.U. et al. Does radiological evaluation of endobutton positioning in the sagittal plane affect clinical functional results in single-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction?. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 141, 977–985 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00402-020-03748-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00402-020-03748-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation