Abstract

To investigate the kinematics differences between round-tunnel (ROT) and flat-tunnel (FLT) techniques in anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction when using hamstring graft. Nine matched pairs of fresh-frozen cadaveric knees were evaluated for the kinematics of intact, ACL-sectioned, and either ROT or FLT reconstructed knees. The graft bundles for FLT technique were separately tensioned. A 6 degrees of freedom robotic system was used to assess knee laxity: (1) 134-N anterior tibial load at 0°, 15°, 30°, 60°, and 90°of knee flexion; (2) 10 Nm of valgus torque followed by 5 Nm of internal rotation torque simulates a pivot-shift test at 15° and 30°; (3) 5-Nm internal and external rotation torques at 0°, 15°, 30°, 60°, and 90°; (4) 10-Nm varus and valgus torques at 15° and 30°. Significant differences were found for ROT versus FLT techniques in terms of the simulated pivot-shift test at 15° (2.5 mm vs 1.4 mm, respectively, difference from intact; P=.039) and the internal rotation test at 15° (2.5° vs 0.5°, respectively, difference from intact; P=.034) and 30° (2.0° vs 0.4°, respectively, difference from intact; P=.014). No significant differences were found between groups during 134-N anterior tibial load, external rotation and valgus/varus rotation. Neither technique was able to reproduce the intact state during an anterior tibial load and simulated pivot-shift test. The FLT technique with independently tensioned bundles shows the same anterior control as the ROT technique but better restores rotational stability in terms of the simulated pivot-shift test and the internal rotation test in anatomic ACL reconstruction at time zero. The FLT technique with independently tensioned bundles of ACL reconstruction appears to be a viable, more anatomic technique than the ROT technique in mimicking flat anatomy and rotational stability of native ACL.

Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call