Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Single-bundle versus double-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: an up-to-date meta-analysis

  • Review Article
  • Published:
International Orthopaedics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

The aim of this meta-analysis was to compare the results of arthroscopic single-bundle and double-bundle anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction.

Methods

We systematically searched electronic databases to identify randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in which arthroscopic single-bundle was compared with double-bundle for ACL reconstruction. The search strategy followed the requirements of the Cochrane Library Handbook. The outcomes of these studies were analysed in terms of graft failures, Lysholm score, negative pivot-shift test, KT1000 arthrometer measurements, knee extensor and flexor peak torques, knee extension and flexion deficit, and subjective and objective International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) final score. Methodological quality was assessed and data were extracted independently. Standard mean difference (SMD) or odds ratio (OR) with 95 % confidence interval (CI) was calculated by a fixed effects or random effects model. Heterogeneity across the studies was assessed with the I-square and chi-square statistic. Forest plots were also generated.

Results

We identified 17 RCTs comprising 1,381 patients who were treated by arthroscopic single-bundle versus double-bundle ACL reconstruction. The results of meta-analysis of these studies showed that arthroscopic double-bundle reconstruction was associated with a lower risk of graft failures (P = 0.002) and a lower rate of positive pivot-shift test (P < 0.0001). Compared with single-bundle reconstruction, double-bundle reconstruction had a lower KT1000 arthrometer measurement (P < 0.00001), a lower knee extension deficit (P = 0.006) and a higher subjective IKDC score (P = 0.03). There was no statistically significant difference between single-bundle and double-bundle reconstruction in Lysholm score (P = 0.91), knee extensor peak torques (P = 0.97), knee flexor peak torques (P = 0.96), knee flexion deficit (P = 0.30) and objective IKDC score (P = 0.18).

Conclusions

Considering the more favourable outcomes of graft failures, knee joint stability and knee joint function in double-bundle reconstruction, we concluded that arthroscopic double-bundle reconstruction should be considered as the primary treatment in ACL reconstruction.

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.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11
Fig. 12
Fig. 13
Fig. 14

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Zelle BA, Brucker PU, Feng MT, Fu FH (2006) Anatomical double-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Sports Med 36:99–108

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Zantop T, Herbort M, Raschke MJ, Fu FH, Petersen W (2007) The role of the anteromedial and posterolateral bundles of the anterior cruciate ligament in anterior tibial translation and internal rotation. Am J Sports Med 35:223–227

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Girgis FG, Marshall JL, Monajem A (1975) The cruciate ligaments of the knee joint. Anatomical, functional and experimental analysis. Clin Orthop Relat Res 106:216–231

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Amis AA, Dawkins GP (1991) Functional anatomy of the anterior cruciate ligament. Fibre bundle actions related to ligament replacements and injuries. J Bone Joint Surg Br 73:260–267

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Woo SL, Kanamori A, Zeminski J, Yagi M, Papageorgiou C, Fu FH (2002) The effectiveness of reconstruction of the anterior cruciate ligament with hamstrings and patellar tendon. A cadaveric study comparing anterior tibial and rotational loads. J Bone Joint Surg Am 84-A:907–914

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Kanamori A, Zeminski J, Rudy TW, Li G, Fu FH, Woo SL (2002) The effect of axial tibial torque on the function of the anterior cruciate ligament: a biomechanical study of a simulated pivot shift test. Arthroscopy 18:394–398

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Mae T, Shino K, Miyama T, Shinjo H, Ochi T, Yoshikawa H, Fujie H (2001) Single- versus two-femoral socket anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction technique: biomechanical analysis using a robotic simulator. Arthroscopy 17:708–716

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Gabriel MT, Wong EK, Woo SL, Yagi M, Debski RE (2004) Distribution of in situ forces in the anterior cruciate ligament in response to rotatory loads. J Orthop Res 22:85–89

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Yagi M, Kuroda R, Nagamune K, Yoshiya S, Kurosaka M (2007) Double-bundle ACL reconstruction can improve rotational stability. Clin Orthop Relat Res 454:100–107

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Park SJ, Jung YB, Jung HJ, Jung HJ, Shin HK, Kim E, Song KS, Kim GS, Cheon HY, Kim S (2010) Outcome of arthroscopic single-bundle versus double-bundle reconstruction of the anterior cruciate ligament: a preliminary 2-year prospective study. Arthroscopy 26:630–636

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Kanaya A, Ochi M, Deie M, Adachi N, Nishimori M, Nakamae A (2009) Intraoperative evaluation of anteroposterior and rotational stabilities in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: lower femoral tunnel placed single-bundle versus double-bundle reconstruction. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 17:907–913

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Lee S, Kim H, Jang J, Seong SC, Lee MC (2012) Comparison of anterior and rotatory laxity using navigation between single- and double-bundle ACL reconstruction: prospective randomized trial. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 20:752–761

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Núñez M, Sastre S, Núñez E, Lozano L, Nicodemo C, Segur JM (2012) Health-related quality of life and direct costs in patients with anterior cruciate ligament injury: single-bundle versus double-bundle reconstruction in a low-demand cohort-a randomized trial with 2 years of follow-up. Arthroscopy 28:929–935

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Ochiai S, Hagino T, Senga S, Saito M, Haro H (2012) Prospective evaluation of patients with anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction using a patient-based health-related survey: comparison of single-bundle and anatomical double-bundle techniques. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 132:393–398

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Araki D, Kuroda R, Kubo S, Fujita N, Tei K, Nishimoto K, Hoshino Y, Matsushita T, Matsumoto T, Nagamune K, Kurosaka M (2011) A prospective randomised study of anatomical single-bundle versus double-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: quantitative evaluation using an electromagnetic measurement system. Int Orthop 35:439–446

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Hussein M, van Eck CF, Cretnik A, Dinevski D, Fu FH (2012) Prospective randomized clinical evaluation of conventional single-bundle, anatomic single-bundle, and anatomic double-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: 281 cases with 3– to 5–year follow-up. Am J Sports Med 40:512–520

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Hemmerich A, van der Merwe W, Batterham M, Vaughan CL (2011) Knee rotational laxity in a randomized comparison of single- versus double-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Am J Sports Med 39:48–56

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Zaffagnini S, Bruni D, Marcheggiani Muccioli GM, Bonanzinga T, Lopomo N, Bignozzi S, Marcacci M (2011) Single-bundle patellar tendon versus non-anatomical double-bundle hamstrings ACL reconstruction: a prospective randomized study at 8-year minimum follow-up. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 19:390–397

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Aglietti P, Giron F, Losco M, Cuomo P, Ciardullo A, Mondanelli N (2010) Comparison between single- and double-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a prospective, randomized, single-blinded clinical trial. Am J Sports Med 38:25–34

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Ibrahim SA, Hamido F, Al Misfer AK, Mahgoob A, Ghafar SA, Alhran H (2009) Anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction using autologous hamstring double bundle graft compared with single bundle procedures. J Bone Joint Surg Br 91:1310–1315

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Wang JQ, Ao YF, Yu CL, Liu P, Xu Y, Chen LX (2009) Clinical evaluation of double-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction procedure using hamstring tendon grafts: a prospective, randomized and controlled study. Chin Med J (Engl) 122:706–711

    Google Scholar 

  22. Järvelä T, Moisala AS, Sihvonen R, Järvelä S, Kannus P, Järvinen M (2008) Double-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction using hamstring autografts and bioabsorbable interference screw fixation: prospective, randomized, clinical study with 2-year results. Am J Sports Med 36:290–297

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Suomalainen P, Moisala AS, Paakkala A, Kannus P, Järvelä T (2011) Double-bundle versus single-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: randomized clinical and magnetic resonance imaging study with 2-year follow-up. Am J Sports Med 39:1615–1622

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Järvelä T, Moisala AS, Paakkala T, Paakkala A (2008) Tunnel enlargement after double-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a prospective, randomized study. Arthroscopy 24:1349–1357

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Siebold R, Dehler C, Ellert T (2008) Prospective randomized comparison of double-bundle versus single-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Arthroscopy 24:137–145

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Streich NA, Friedrich K, Gotterbarm T, Schmitt H (2008) Reconstruction of the ACL with a semitendinosus tendon graft: a prospective randomized single blinded comparison of double-bundle versus single-bundle technique in male athletes. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 16:232–238

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Muneta T, Koga H, Mochizuki T, Ju YJ, Hara K, Nimura A, Yagishita K, Sekiya I (2007) A prospective randomized study of 4-strand semitendinosus tendon anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction comparing single-bundle and double-bundle techniques. Arthroscopy 23:618–628

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Järvelä T (2007) Double-bundle versus single-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a prospective, randomize clinical study. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 15:500–507

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Adachi N, Ochi M, Uchio Y, Iwasa J, Kuriwaka M, Ito Y (2004) Reconstruction of the anterior cruciate ligament. Single- versus double-bundle multistranded hamstring tendons. J Bone Joint Surg Br 86:515–520

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. Kongtharvonskul J, Attia J, Thamakaison S, Kijkunasathian C, Woratanarat P, Thakkinstian A (2012) Clinical outcomes of double- vs single-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a systematic review of randomized control trials. Scand J Med Sci Sports. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0838.2011.01439.x

  31. Lysholm J, Gillquist J (1982) Evaluation of knee ligament surgery results with special emphasis on use of a scoring scale. Am J Sports Med 10:150–154

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  32. Irrgang JJ, Anderson AF, Boland AL, Harner CD, Kurosaka M, Neyret P, Richmond JC, Shelborne KD (2001) Development and validation of the international knee documentation committee subjective knee form. Am J Sports Med 29:600–613

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  33. Daniel DM, Malcom LL, Losse G, Stone ML, Sachs R, Burks R (1985) Instrumented measurement of anterior laxity of the knee. J Bone Joint Surg Am 67:720–726

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  34. Moher D, Schulz KF, Altman DG, CONSORT Group (2005) The CONSORT statement: revised recommendations for improving the quality of reports of parallel-group randomized trials 2001. Explore (NY) 1:40–45

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Egger M, Davey Smith G, Schneider M, Minder C (1997) Bias in meta-analysis detected by a simple, graphical test. BMJ 315:629–634

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  36. Griffin LY, Agel J, Albohm MJ, Arendt EA, Dick RW, Garrett WE, Garrick JG, Hewett TE, Huston L, Ireland ML, Johnson RJ, Kibler WB, Lephart S, Lewis JL, Lindenfeld TN, Mandelbaum BR, Marchak P, Teitz CC, Wojtys EM (2000) Noncontact anterior cruciate ligament injuries: risk factors and prevention strategies. J Am Acad Orthop Surg 8:141–150

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  37. Mott HW (1983) Semitendinosus anatomic reconstruction for cruciate ligament insufficiency. Clin Orthop Relat Res 172:90–92

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Zaricznyj B (1987) Reconstruction of the anterior cruciate ligament of the knee using a doubled tendon graft. Clin Orthop Relat Res 220:162–175

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Yasuda K, Kondo E, Ichiyama H, Tanabe Y, Tohyama H (2006) Clinical evaluation of anatomic double-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction procedure using hamstring tendon grafts: comparisons among 3 different procedures. Arthroscopy 22:240–251

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Radford WJ, Amis AA (1990) Biomechanics of a double prosthetic ligament in the anterior cruciate deficient knee. J Bone Joint Surg Br 72:1038–1043

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  41. Fujita N, Kuroda R, Matsumoto T, Yamaguchi M, Yagi M, Matsumoto A, Kubo S, Matsushita T, Hoshino Y, Nishimoto K, Araki D, Kurosaka M (2011) Comparison of the clinical outcome of double-bundle, anteromedial single-bundle, and posterolateral single-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction using hamstring tendon graft with minimum 2-year follow-up. Arthroscopy 27:906–913

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Kondo E, Yasuda K, Azuma H, Tanabe Y, Yagi T (2008) Prospective clinical comparisons of anatomic double-bundle versus single-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction procedures in 328 consecutive patients. Am J Sports Med 36:1675–1687

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Sastre S, Popescu D, Núñez M, Pomes J, Tomas X, Peidro L (2010) Double-bundle versus single-bundle ACL reconstruction using the horizontal femoral position: a prospective, randomized study. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 18:32–36

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Niki Y, Hakozaki A, Iwamoto W, Kanagawa H, Matsumoto H, Toyama Y, Suda Y (2012) Factors affecting anterior knee pain following anatomic double-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 20:1543–1549

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Yagi M, Wong EK, Kanamori A, Debski RE, Fu FH, Woo SL (2002) Biomechanical analysis of an anatomic anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Am J Sports Med 30:660–666

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. Meredick RB, Vance KJ, Appleby D, Lubowitz JH (2008) Outcome of single-bundle versus double-bundle reconstruction of the anterior cruciate ligament: a meta-analysis. Am J Sports Med 36:1414–1421

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. Hensler D, Illingworth K, Fu FH (2010) Principle consideration in anatomic ACL reconstruction. Arthroscopy 26:1414–1415

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  48. Shen W, Forsythe B, Ingham SM, Honkamp NJ, Fu FH (2008) Application of the anatomic double-bundle reconstruction concept to revision and augmentation anterior cruciate ligament surgeries. J Bone Joint Surg Am 90(Suppl 4):20–34

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  49. Giron F, Cuomo P, Edwards A, Bull AMJ, Amis AA, Aglietti P (2007) Double-bundle “anatomic” anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a cadaveric study of tunnel positioning with a transtibial technique. Arthroscopy 23:7–13

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Conflicts of interest

None.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Orthopaedics and Traumatology, Nanfang Hospital, Southern Medical University, No.1838, Guangzhou Avenue North, Guangzhou, 510515, People’s Republic of China

    Xue Li, Jin-qi Song, Nan Jiang & Bin Yu

  2. Key Laboratory of Bone and Cartilage Regenerative Medicine, Nanfang Hospital, Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, People’s Republic of China

    Chang-peng Xu

Authors
  1. Xue Li
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Chang-peng Xu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Jin-qi Song
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Nan Jiang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Bin Yu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Bin Yu.

Additional information

Xue Li and Chang-peng Xu contributed equally to this study.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Li, X., Xu, Cp., Song, Jq. et al. Single-bundle versus double-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: an up-to-date meta-analysis. International Orthopaedics (SICOT) 37, 213–226 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00264-012-1651-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00264-012-1651-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation