Double-bundle Anterior Cruciate Ligament Research Articles

Augmentation of Anterolateral Structures of the Knee Causes Undesirable Tibiofemoral Cartilage Contact in Double-Bundle Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction—A Randomized In-Vivo Biomechanics Study

To analyze the invivo tibiofemoral cartilage contact patterns in knees undergoing double-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction(DB-ACLR) with or without anterolateral structure augmentation (ALSA). Twenty patients with an ACL-ruptured knee and a healthy contralateral side were included. Nine patients received an isolated DB-ACLR (DB-ACLR group), and 11 patients had a DB-ACLR with ALSA (DB+ALSA group). At 1-year follow-up, a combined computed tomography, magnetic resonance imaging, and dual fluoroscopy imaging system analysis was used to capture a single-legged lunge of both the operated and healthy contralateral side. Tibiofemoral contact points (CPs) of the medial and lateral compartments were compared. CP locations were expressed as anteroposterior (AP, +/-) and medial-lateral (ML, -/+) values according to the tibia. In the DB-ACLR knees, no significant differences were found in CPs when compared with the healthy contralateral knees (P ≥ .31). However, in the DB+ALSA knees, the CPs in the lateral compartment had a significantly more anterior (mean AP: operative, -2.8 mm, 95% confidence interval [CI] -5.0 to-0.7 vs healthy, -5.0 mm, 95% CI -6.7 to -3.2; P= .006) and lateral (mean ML: operative, 23.2 mm, 95% CI 21.9-24.5 vs healthy, 21.8 mm, 95% CI 20.2-23.3; P= .013) location. The CPs in the medial compartment were located significantly more posterior (mean AP: operative, -3.4, 95% CI -5.0 to -1.9 vs healthy, -1.3, 95% CI -2.6 to -0.1; P= .006) and lateral (mean ML: operative, -21.3, 95% CI -22.6 to -20.0 vs healthy, -22.6, 95% CI -24.2 to -21.0; P= .021). DB-ACLR restored the tibiofemoral cartilage contact mechanics to near-normal values at 1-year follow-up. Adding the ALSA to the DB-ACLR resulted in significantly altered tibiofemoral cartilage contact locations in both the medial and lateral compartments. In DB-ACLR knees, the addition of an ALSA may be unfavorable as it caused significantly changed arthrokinematics.

Comparing post-operative pain between single bundle and double bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a retrospective study

BackgroundIn anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction, the clinical outcome and level of post-operative pain are important factors. To date there have been no studies evaluating differences in post-operative pain between single bundle and double bundle ACL reconstruction with a hamstring graft.Hypothesis/purposeWe hypothesized that post-operative pain in single bundle ACL reconstruction would be less than in double bundle ACL reconstruction. This study was to compare post-operative pain between patients undergoing single bundle versus double bundle ACL reconstruction.Study designCohort study.MethodsThis was a retrospective study comparing post-operative pain scores between single bundle and double bundle ACL reconstruction. Each patient was given our standard regimen of oral diclofenac (25 mg/tab) three times per day and paracetamol (500 mg/tab) six times per day for 1 day post-operatively. If the patient complained of moderate to severe pain (pain numeric rating scale (PNRS) > 3), 3 mg of morphine was injected intravenously every 3 h for 24 h and 1 mg of morphine as a rescue medication every 1 h for 24 h. PNRS and morphine consumption were recorded at 4-h intervals for 24 h.Results209 patients were included in this study of whom 102 and 107 patients received single bundle and double bundle ACL reconstruction, respectively. The average post-operative pain scores of the single bundle group were lower at all time points. Linear mixed effect regression analyses showed that the single bungle group had lower post-operative pain than the double bundle group after adjusting for confounders (beta = − 0.45; 95% CI = − 0.838, − 0.062) but there was no statistically significant difference between numbers of bundle ACL reconstruction with regard to morphine consumption.ConclusionSingle bundle ACL reconstruction had significantly lower post-operative pain scores than double bundle ACL reconstruction.Clinical relevanceDouble bundle ACL reconstruction results in higher post-operative pain, which may slow the start of rehabilitation and reduce patient satisfaction. In middle-aged adult patients with low-demand activities, we suggest performing a single bundle ACL reconstruction.

Subjective assessment reported by patients shows differences between single-bundle and double-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction, systematic review and meta-analysis

To determine the functional recovery, active reincorporation, and anteroposterior and rotational stability of patients undergoing anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction using arthroscopy techniques with simple-bundle (SB) or double-bundle (DB). The following databases were searched: PubMed, Embase (Elsevier platform), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (Wiley platform), Web of Science, and CINAHL. Level I and II studies involving anterior cruciate ligament arthroscopy were included in the search. Records were screened by title and abstract and assessed the risk of bias of selected studies. Meta-analyses using RevMan 5.3 software were conducted on the following outcomes: knee functionality, objective measurements of knee stability, rotational knee stability and knee anterior stability, sports reincorporation, and subjective assessments. Twenty-four studies of patients undergoing ACL reconstruction were included in the qualitative and quantitative synthesis (1707 patients) for Lysholm score, Subjective International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) score, Tegner score, KT-1000/2000, Lachman test, Objective IKDC score, and Pivot-Shift test. A return to pre-injury level showed a significant decrease in the Lysholm score (mean difference, − 0.99; 95% CI − 1.71 to − 0.40; P = 0.007) and Tegner score (mean difference, − 0.07; 95% CI, − 0.13 to − 0.01; P = 0.02) at DB reconstruction, similar to the knee functionality outcome of the subjective IKDC score (mean difference − 1.42; 95% CI − 2.46 to − 0.38; P = 0.007). There is no clear or significant difference in clinical stability and knee function or in sports incorporation with the true difference occurring in the subjective assessment.

Anterolateral ligament reconstruction in addition to primary double-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction for grade 3 pivot shift improves residual knee instability during surgery

PurposeHigh-grade pivot shift in the anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injured knee is a risk factor for postoperative residual pivot shift. Procedures in addition to ACL reconstruction such as anterolateral ligament (ALL) reconstruction have been performed for patients with a high-risk of residual pivot shift. The aim of this study was to investigate the effect of the addition of ALL reconstruction to primary double-bundle ACL reconstruction in patients with preoperative high-grade pivot shift to improve stability as evaluated by quantitative measurement.MethodsPatients with ACL injuries who showed preoperative grade 3 subjective pivot shift and who underwent primary double-bundle ACL reconstruction combined with ALL reconstructions were retrospectively enrolled. Anterior tibial translation (ATT) in the Lachman test, and acceleration and external rotational angular velocity (ERAV) in the pivot shift were measured as quantitative values. Quantitative values before surgical intervention for ACL-injured knees (ACLD) and uninjured contralateral knees (intact), after temporary fixation of the isolated ACL grafts (ACLR), and subsequently after temporary fixation of both ACL and ALL grafts (ACLR + ALLR) were measured with the patient under general anaesthesia.ResultsIn total, 18 patients were included. The ATT was lower in ACLR and ACLR + ALLR than in intact (P = .008 and .005), while there was no significant difference between ACLR and ACLR + ALLR (P > .05). The acceleration of ACLR + ALLR was lower than that for ACLR (P = .008), while there was no significant difference between intact and ACLR or ACLR + ALLR (P > .05). The ERAV of ACLR was higher than that of intact (P < .001), while that of ACLR + ALLR was lower than that of ACLR (P < 0.001), and there was no significant difference in ERAV between intact and ACLR + ALLR (P > 0.05).ConclusionAccording to quantitative assessment of the pivot shift, the addition of ALL reconstruction to primary double-bundle ACL reconstruction improved residual knee instability and restored knee stability during surgery. Combination of ALL reconstruction with primary double-bundle ACL reconstruction was effective for patients with ACL injuries exhibiting a preoperative grade 3 subjective pivot shift.Level of evidenceIV

Randomized comparative study of suspension femoral fixation device in graft position maintenance in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: EndoButton CL vs TightRope RT

BackgroundIn double-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR), fixed-loop and adjustable-loop cortical suspensory devices are commonly used to fix the soft graft on the femoral side. However, few studies have compared in vivo elongation of the two devices. The purpose of this study was to determine whether EndoButton CL (EB) and TightRope RT (TR), the suspensory fixation devices used in ACLR, maintained their length in vivo from the time of surgery through the postoperative period in a randomized controlled trial. MethodsThis study prospectively incorporated 30 patients undergoing initial ACLR at a single center. Participants were divided into two groups using a stratified randomization method with age and sex as assignment adjustment factors. EB or TR was used for fixation of the soft graft on the femoral side. The primary endpoint was to compare the elongation distance of the suspensory device. MRIs were taken within seven days after ACLR and 3,6,12 months postoperatively and measured by a radiologist in a blinded fashion. Secondary endpoints included the side-to-side difference in anterior translation, one leg hop test (HOP index), Lachman test, lateral pivot shift test, and Lysholm score one year postoperatively. ResultsTwenty-eight patients (EB, n = 13; TR, n = 15) were followed for one year. There was no significant difference between EB and TR groups in elongation from the immediate postoperative period to 3, 6, 12 months after surgery. However, the non-inferiority of TR to EB (non-inferiority margin: 1.5 mm) was not proved by the difference in measured elongation between the two groups (TR – EB, lower 95% CI. AM: 1.80 mm; PL: 1.86 mm) at 6 months. There was no significant difference in anterior translation, HOP index, Lachman test, lateral pivot shift test, or Lysholm score. ConclusionEB and TR had similar graft retaining ability in vivo for 12 months, but the non-inferiority of TR against EB was not verified statistically.

Clinical Outcome Evaluation of Anatomic Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction With Tunnel Positioning Using Gold Standard Techniques: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

Background:There have been conflicting results about the theoretical advantages of anatomic double-bundle anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction.Purpose:To evaluate the clinical and functional outcomes comparing anatomic single- versus double-bundle techniques, anatomic versus nonanatomic techniques, and transportal versus outside-in tunnel drilling for ACL reconstruction.Study Design:Systematic review; Level of evidence, 3.Methods:A search was performed in the MEDLINE and EMBASE databases up to August 2018 for clinical trials comparing anatomic ACL reconstruction (with tunnel positioning demonstrated using gold standard radiologic techniques) with another technique, with a minimum functional and biomechanical follow-up of 6 months. A meta-analysis was performed to compare clinical and functional outcomes between anatomic single- versus double-bundle reconstruction and between anatomic versus nonanatomic techniques, using the risk difference or the mean difference. Risk of bias of the included studies was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale for cohort and case-control studies and the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool and Jadad Score for randomized controlled trials.Results:Included were 15 studies comprising 1290 patients (follow-up, 12-36 months). No significant differences favoring anatomic double-bundle over anatomic single-bundle reconstruction or outside-in over transportal techniques were found. The meta-analyses showed significant differences in the International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) objective score (risk difference, –0.14; 95% confidence interval, –0.27 to –0.01) favoring anatomic over nonanatomic reconstruction. No statistically significant differences were found between anatomic and nonanatomic surgical techniques on other functional scores or clinical examination outcomes, including the IKDC subjective score, Lysholm score, Tegner score, KT-1000 arthrometer test, or pivot-shift test.Conclusion:Double-bundle reconstruction was not superior to the single-bundle technique in clinical and functional outcomes. Anatomic ACL reconstruction shows significantly superior results over nonanatomic ACL reconstruction, reinforcing the anatomic technique as the gold standard choice for clinical practice.

Clinical outcome of a new remnant augmentation technique with anatomical double-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: Comparison among remnant preservation, resection, and absent groups

PurposeThe aim of this study was to verify the effects of a new remnant augmentation technique with anatomical double-bundle anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction for postoperative clinical scores, anterior stability and frequency of complications compared to remnant removal and cases with remnant defects. MethodsThe 105 patients who underwent anatomical double-bundle ACL reconstruction were divided into three groups. If the remnant was a Crain I-III type, remnant-preserving bone tunnel creation was attempted. After the creation of the bone tunnel, good continuity was maintained in 34 patients (preserved group). Due to lost continuity, the remnant was resected in 26 patients (resected group). No identifiable remnant continuity remained (Crain IV) in 45 patients (absent group). The Lysholm knee score, Tegner activity scale, International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) subjective score, anterior stability measured using the KT-1000 arthrometer at 2 years postoperatively, and frequency of complications were compared among the three groups. Univariate and multiple linear regression analysis were performed to clarify the factors affecting postoperative anterior stability. ResultsThe Lysholm knee score, Tegner activity scale, IKDC subjective score, and frequency of complications were not significantly different among the groups. The mean side-to-side difference of anterior stability was significantly better in the preserved group (0.3 ± 1.6 mm) compared to the resected group (1.6 ± 2.3 mm, p = 0.003) and absent group (1.6 mm ± 1.7, p = 0.009). The multiple linear regression analysis showed remnant preservation significantly related to postoperative anterior stability. ConclusionAlthough there were no differences in clinical scores, the ACL reconstruction with new preservation technique showed good anterior stability and no difference in the frequency of complications.

Radiological maturation and clinical results of double-bundle and single-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. A 5-year prospective case-controlled trial.

The aim of the study was to make a prospective comparison of the radiological and clinical outcomes of patients undergoing single-bundle and double-bundle anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction. This prospective, case-controlled study included 65 patients, separated into 2 groups as 33 patients undergoing single bundle (SB), and 32 patients undergoing double bundle (DB) ACL reconstruction. The patients were evaluated clinically using the International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) and the Lysholm knee scores. Stability was evaluated with the KT-1000 Arthrometer Measurement, the Lachman and pivot shift tests. Magnetic resonance images (MRI) at 1 and 5years postoperatively were evaluated by a musculoskeletal radiologist. All the operations were performed by a single surgeon and the clinical evaluations were made by an independent researcher. Evaluation was made of a total of 53 patients (SB: 28, DB: 25). No statistically significant difference was determined between the groups regarding the postoperative IKDC and Lysholm scores. The pivot shift tests were negative in the DB group and positive in two patients of the SB group. The Lachman test was negative in all the patients. No significant difference was determined between the groups. No statistically significant difference was determined between the two groups in respect of the arthrometer measurements. In the SB group, revision surgery was performed in two patients due to graft failure. No graft failure findings were determined in the DB group, and no statistically significant difference was determined between the groups in respect of graft failure. On the MRIs taken at 1 year postoperatively, the ACL was seen to be hyperintense in 16 patients in the DB group and 6 patients in the SB group (p = 0.004). On the 5-year MRIs, ACL hypointensity could not be seen in three patients of the SB group and two of the DB group, with no difference determined between the groups (p > 0.05). In the 5-year follow-up period, no difference was determined between patients undergoing SB ACL reconstruction and those undergoing DB ACL reconstruction regarding clinical scores, knee stability, and MRI findings, but graft maturation occurs later the patients undergoing DB reconstruction.

Pain Following Single-bundle versus Double-bundle Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND: Double-bundle (DB) anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) has been known to result in better functional outcomes, joint stability, and lower revision rates compared to single-bundle (SB) ACLR. However, given the increased invasiveness and damage to the surrounding tissue area, it is proposed that it may be associated with increased pain. AIM: This review aims to gather all studies and literature that reported pain as an outcome when comparing SB versus DB ACLR. METHODS: Literature searching was conducted across seven search engines for studies reporting pain as an outcome and comparing SB versus DB ACLR. RESULTS: Eight studies met the eligibility criteria and were included in the study. Overall, the studies show variable findings regarding pain in DB compared to SB ACLR, with the only statistically significant results from two studies indicating that DB ACLR is associated with more pain than SB ACLR. CONCLUSION: Based on the limited evidence available, no conclusions can be made regarding the pain experienced between people receiving either procedure. This constitutes a need for additional studies with increased follow-up time periods, larger sample size, and better study design.

Anatomic single vs. double-bundle ACL reconstruction: a randomized clinical trial\u2013Part 1: clinical outcomes

PurposeCompare clinical outcomes of anatomic single-bundle (SB) to anatomic double-bundle (DB) anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR). It was hypothesized that anatomic DB ACLR would result in better International Knee Documentation Committee Subjective Knee Form (IKDC-SKF) scores and reduced anterior and rotatory laxity compared to SB ACLR.MethodsActive individuals between 14 and 50 years of age that presented within 12 months of injury were eligible to participate. Individuals with prior injury or surgery of either knee, greater than a grade 1 concomitant knee ligament injury, or ACL insertion sites less than 14 mm or greater than 18 mm were excluded. Subjects were randomized to undergo SB or DB ACLR with a 10 mm-wide quadriceps tendon autograft harvested with a patellar bone block and were followed for 24 months. The primary outcome measures included the IKDC-SKF and KT-1000 (side to side difference) and pivot shift tests. Other secondary outcomes included measures of sports activity and participation, range of motion (ROM) and re-injury.ResultsEnrollment in the study was suspended due to patellar fractures related to harvest of the patellar bone plug. At that time, 57 subjects had been randomized (29 DB) and two-year follow-up was attained from 51 (89.5%). At 24-month follow-up there were no between-group differences detected for the primary outcomes. Twenty-one (77.8%) DB’s and 20 (83.3%) SB’s reported returning to pre-injury sports 2 years after surgery (n.s) Three subjects (2 DB’s, 5.3% of total) sustained a graft rupture and 5 individuals (4 SB’s, 8.8% of total) had a subsequent meniscus injury.ConclusionsDue to the early termination of the study, there were no detectable differences in clinical outcome between anatomic SB and DB ACLR when performed with a quadriceps tendon autograft with a bone block in individuals with ACL insertion sites that range from 14 to 18 mm.Level of EvidenceLevel 2

Laterally shifted tibial tunnel can be the risk of residual knee laxity for double-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction.

To elucidate the relationship between graft tunnel position and knee laxity in the cases of double-bundle ACL reconstruction. Total of 132 cases were included. Femoral and tibial tunnels were evaluated by quadrant method on 3D-CT. As additional reference of tibia, the distances from medial tibial spine to the tunnel center (DMS) and from Parsons' knob to the tunnel center (DPK) were evaluated; %DMS/ML and %DPK/AP were calculated (ML and AP: mediolateral and anteroposterior width of tibial plateau). Preoperative and postoperative (1year from surgery) stabilities were evaluated by Lachman and pivot-shift procedures. If there was ≥ 2mm side-to-side difference, the subject was defined as having anterior knee laxity (AKL); if the pivot-shift phenomenon was observed with IKDC grade ≥ 1, there was rotatory knee laxity (RKL). Multiple logistic regression analysis was conducted with the prevalence of AKL or RKL as the dependent variable and with tunnel positions as the independent variables. Overall, 21 subjects (15.9%) showed AKL, and 15 subjects (11.4%) showed RKL. Those with postoperative laxity showed higher %DMS/ML and higher femoral position than those without laxity. Regarding posterolateral bundle, logistic regression model estimated that %DMS/ML was associated with the prevalence of AKL (B = 0.608; p < 0.001) and RKL (B = 0.789; p < 0.001); %high-low femoral tunnel position (B = - 0.127; p = 0.023) was associated with that of RKL. There was the risk of residual knee laxity in ACL-reconstructed knee when tibial tunnel shifted more laterally or higher femoral tunnel was created with regard to posterolateral bundle. III.

Biomechanical Difference between Conventional Transtibial Single-Bundle and Anatomical Transportal Double-Bundle Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction Using Three-Dimensional Finite Element Model Analysis

The purpose of our study was to analyze the graft contact stress at the tunnel after transtibial single-bundle (SB) and transportal double-bundle (DB) anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction. After transtibial SB (20 cases) and transportal DB (29 cases) ACL reconstruction, the three-dimensional image of each patient made by postoperative computed tomography was adjusted to the validation model of a normal knee and simulated SB and DB ACL reconstructions were created based on the average tunnel position and direction of each group. We also measured graft and contact stresses at the tunnel after a 134 N anterior load from 0° to 90° flexion. The graft and contact stresses became the greatest at 30° and 0° flexion, respectively. The total graft and contact stresses after DB ACL reconstruction were greater than those after SB ACL reconstruction from 0° to 30° and 0° to 90° knee flexion, respectively. However, the graft and contact stresses of each graft after DB ACL reconstruction were less than those after SB ACL reconstruction. In conclusion, the total graft and total contact stresses after DB ACL reconstruction are higher than those after SB ACL reconstruction from 0° to 30° and 0° to 90° knee flexion, respectively. However, the stresses of each graft after DB ACL reconstruction are about half of those after SB ACL reconstruction.

Les longueurs intra-articulaires des greffons à double faisceau peuvent changer pendant la flexion du genou : mesures peropératoires lors de reconstructions anatomiques du ligament croisé antérieur

BackgroundThe lengths of the anteromedial bundle (AMB) and posterolateral bundle (PLB) change during knee motion during double-bundle anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction. However, the actual intra-articular graft length would be affected by the bone tunnel position and tunnel creation angle during ACL reconstruction. The aim of this study was to investigate the intra-articular length change of the AMB and PLB in patients who underwent anatomic double-bundle ACL reconstruction. HypothesisWe hypothesized that the PLB would show a more dynamic length change pattern than the AMB during knee flexion at ACL reconstruction. MethodsThirty-two patients (16 men and 16 women) who had isolated ACL injuries with intact menisci were investigated. Anatomic double-bundle ACL reconstructions were performed using semitendinosus tendon autografts at a mean age of 30.6 years. The graft and tunnel lengths were measured intraoperatively. Intra-articular graft lengths and length changes were calculated at 0° and 90° of knee flexion during ACL reconstruction. Intraoperative data were collected prospectively, and analyses were performed retrospectively. ResultsThe intra-articular length of the AMB at 0° of knee flexion was 28.1±5.5mm. At 90° of knee flexion, the AMB intra-articular length decreased to 25.6±4.8mm. The intra-articular length of the PLB decreased to 17.7±4.6mm at 90° of knee flexion compared to 22.0±4.2mm at 0° of knee flexion. Changes in the intra-articular graft length during knee flexion were detected more in the PLB (4.1mm) than in the AMB (2.0mm, p=0.01). DiscussionThis study demonstrated that the intra-articular length change of the PLB during knee motion was larger than that of the AMB in anatomic double-bundle ACL reconstructions with semitendinosus tendon autografts and suspensory femoral fixation devices. Level of evidenceIV ; retrospective cohort study.

Femoral Tunnel Widening After Double-Bundle Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction With Hamstring Autograft Produces a Small Shift of the Tunnel Position in the Anterior and Distal Direction: Computed Tomography–Based Retrospective Cohort Analysis

To determine whether the femoral tunnel position remains in an anatomical footprint after tunnel widening and shifting. Patients who underwent unilateral double-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction with hamstring autograft and performed computed tomography scan evaluation at the time of 5 days and 1 year postoperatively were included in this retrospective cohort study. Three-dimensional models of the femur and femoral tunnels were reconstructed from computed tomography scan data. The location of the tunnel center and tunnel margins in the anatomical coordinate system, and the mean shifting distance of tunnel center and margin were measured with image analysis software during the period. The change of tunnel center location in Bernard quadrant was confirmed if the tunnel center remained within the boundaries of anatomical position after tunnel widening. A total of 56 patients satisfied the inclusion criteria. The mean shifting distance of AM and PL tunnel centers were 1.7 ± 0.9 mm and 1.6 ± 0.6 mm. The Tunnel margin of the anteromedial (AM) and posteromedial (PL) tunnels were shifted to 2.5 ± 1.3 mm and 2.6 ± 1.4 mm in the anterior direction, and 1.4 ± 0.9 mm and 1.0 ± 0.7 mm in the distal direction, respectively. Among the anatomical located tunnel, 97% (32/33) and 87.1% (27/31) of AM and PL tunnel centers remained in a range of anatomical footprint. The tunnel center was shifted from the anatomical position into a nonanatomical position in 3% (1/33) of the AM tunnel and 12.9% (4/31) of PL tunnel after tunnel widening. The tunnel location which shifted nonanatomically were relatively anterior and distal position. Tunnel widening shifts the tunnel position to the anterior and distal direction, which could change the initial tunnel position. Nevertheless, the majority of tunnel positions remained in the anatomical position after tunnel widening and shifting. Level III, retrospective cohort study.

Effectiveness of double-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction combined with anterolateral ligament reconstruction for revision

To investigate the effectiveness of double-bundle anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction combined with anterolateral ligament (ALL) reconstruction in the treatment of revision patients with ACL graft failure. Between January 2018 and June 2019, 15 patients underwent ACL revision with double-bundle ACL reconstruction combined with ALL reconstruction. There were 12 males and 3 females with an average age of 30.1 years (range, 17-49 years). The technique of primary ACL reconstruction included single-bundle reconstruction in 13 cases and double-bundle reconstruction in 2 cases. These reconstructions applied autografts in 14 cases and allograft in 1 case. The causes of ACL reconstruction failure were identified as traumatic rupture in 9 cases and non-traumatic failure in 6 cases, including 2 cases of graft absorption and 3 cases of graft laxity. The average time from the primary ACL reconstruction to revision was 28.5 months (range, 8-60 months). The subjective and objective indicators of knee joint function were compared before operation and at last follow-up to evaluate the effectiveness. The subjective indicators included International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) score, Lysholm score, and Tegner score. The objective indicators included anterior tibial translation (dynamic and static) and side-to-side difference (SSD), pivot-shift test, Lachman test, the difference of single-legged hop test, and the loss ratio of extensor muscle strength on the affected side. All incisions healed by first intetion, and no complications such as infection, venous thrombosis of lower extremity, or neurovascular injury occurred. All patients were followed up for an average of 19.1 months (range, 12-30 months). At last follow-up, all patients had returned to pre-injury sports level. The IKDC score, Lysholm score, and Tegner score were significantly improved ( P<0.05); anterior tibial translations (dynamic and static) significantly decreased when compared with preoperative one ( P<0.05) and returned to the physiological range. The SSD, Lachman test, pivot-shift test, the difference of single-legged hop test, and the loss ratio of extensor muscle strength on the affected side were significantly better than those before operation ( P<0.05).During the follow-up, there was no re-rupture of the graft, no stiffness of the knee joint and limitation of mobility; 1 case had a protruding femoral end compression screw, which was removed through the original incision under local anesthesia. Double-bundle ACL reconstruction combined with ALL reconstruction can significantly improve the knee function in revision patients with ACL graft failure. It can reduce the anterior translation of tibia, and effectively prevent postoperative rotational instability of the knee.

Double-Bundle Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction With Lateral Extra-Articular Tenodesis Is Effective in Restoring Knee Stability in a Chronic, Complex Anterior Cruciate Ligament-Injured Knee Model: A Cadaveric Biomechanical Study

To compare knee stability after intra-articular isolated double-bundle (DB) anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) and single-bundle (SB) and DB ACLR combined with lateral extra-articular tenodesis (LET) in a chronic, complex anterior cruciate ligament (ACL)-injured knee model. In 10 fresh-frozen cadaveric knees, we measured knee laxity in the following order: (1) intact knee; (2) ACL-sectioned knee; (3) complex ACL-injured knee model with additional sectioning of the anterolateral complex and the posterior horns of the medial and lateral menisci; (4) SB ACLR plus LET; (5) DB ACLR; and (6) DB ACLR plus LET. In comparison with the intact knee, significantly increased internal rotation (IR) laxity persisted at 60° and 90° after DB ACLR (P= .002 and P= .003, respectively). SB ACLR plus LET and DB ACLR plus LET resulted in significant reductions in IR laxity at 90° (P= .003 and P= .037, respectively), representing overconstraint in IR. SB ACLR plus LET resulted in persistently increased external rotation (ER) laxity at 30°, 60°, and 90° (P= .001, P < .001, and P < .001, respectively). The DB ACLR condition persistently showed significant increases in anterior tibial translation laxity at 60° and 90° (P= .037 and P= .024, respectively). A greater increase in ER laxity was seen after SB ACLR plus LET versus DB ACLR plus LET at 30°, 60°, and 90° (P < .001, P < .001, and P < .001, respectively). DB ACLR plus LET restored intact knee stability in IR, ER, and anterior tibial translation laxity at 0°, 30°, 60°, and 90° of knee flexion except for overconstraint in IR at 90° in a chronic, complex ACL-injured knee model. This cadaveric study provides some biomechanical evidence to support performing DB ACLR combined with LET to restore knee stability after a complex, chronic knee injury involving an ACL tear combined with anterolateral complex injury and irreparable tears of the posterior horns of the medial and lateral menisci.

Influence of selected plane on the evaluation of tibial tunnel locations using a three-dimensional bone model in double-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction

BackgroundThe purpose of this study was to investigate the influence of a selected plane on the evaluation of tibial tunnel locations following anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) between two planes: the plane parallel to the tibial plateau (Plane A) and the plane perpendicular to the proximal tibial shaft axis (Plane B). MethodsThirty-four patients who underwent double-bundle ACLR were included. Three-dimensional model of tibia was created using computed tomography images 2 weeks postoperatively, and tibial tunnels of the anteromedial bundle (AMB) and posterolateral bundle (PLB) were extracted. To evaluate tibial tunnel locations, two planes (Planes A and B) were created. The locations of the tibial tunnel apertures of each bundle were evaluated using a grid method and compared between Planes A and B. The difference in coronal alignment between Planes A and B were also assessed. ResultsThe AMB and PLB tunnel apertures in Plane A were significantly more laterally located than in Plane B (mean difference; AMB, 1.5%; PLB, 1.7%, P < 0.01). There were no significant differences in the anteroposterior direction between the planes. Coronal alignment difference between the planes was 16.8 ± 2.2°; Plane B was more valgus than Plane A. ConclusionAlthough tibial tunnel locations were not significantly influenced by the selected planes in the AP direction, subtle but statistically significant differences were found in the ML direction between the Planes A and B in double-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. The findings suggest that both Planes A and B can be used in the assessment of tibial tunnel locations after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction.

Anatomic Double-Bundle Transtibial Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction

Double-bundle anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction (DBACLR) is a reasonable transition from single-bundle ACL reconstruction to obtain better clinical outcomes, and most authors believe that it can only be performed through a medial portal. However, in our clinical practice, we have found that anatomic DBACLR can be performed easily and exactly through transtibial tunnels just by positioning the tibial tunnels appropriately. Thus, we would like to introduce this anatomic double-bundle transtibial ACL reconstruction technique, in which the most critical step is to create a shallow tibial tunnel for the anteromedial bundle with a proximal projection to the anatomic location of the corresponding femoral tunnel. We believe this Technical Note will give an interesting view of anatomic DBACLR.

Interbundle Impingement Pressure in Individualized and Nonindividualized Double-Bundle Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: A Cadaveric Study.

Background:Graft impingement is one of the main concerns in double-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (DB-ACLR). Impingement between the anteromedial (AM) and posterolateral (PL) bundles has been postulated to cause graft deterioration or rerupture, but this has not been thoroughly investigated, and the interbundle impingement pressure (IIP) has not been well researched.Purpose:To determine the IIP between the AM and PL bundles in the native anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) and in DB-ACLR with individualized and nonindividualized double-tunnel placement.Study Design:Controlled laboratory study.Methods:A total of 30 fresh-frozen, nonpaired, human cadaveric knees were randomly divided into 3 groups of 10 knees: native intact ACL (NI group), DB-ACLR tunnel placement using the preserved remnant procedure (individualized reconstruction) (PR group), and DB-ACLR tunnel placement using the bony landmark procedure (nonindividualized reconstruction) (BL group). Pressure sensors were inserted between the AM and PL bundles. The knee was moved passively from full extension to full flexion, and the IIP between the 2 ACL bundles was measured every 15°. Similarly, the impingement pressure was measured between the ACL and intercondylar roof and between the ACL and posterior cruciate ligament (PCL).Results:No significant differences were found in the maximum, mean, or minimum ACL-roof and ACL-PCL impingement pressures among the 3 groups. The IIP significantly increased when the knee joint was flexed >120° in all 3 groups (P < .001). Compared with the other 2 groups, the BL group had significantly higher maximum and mean IIP throughout the range of knee movement (P < .001) and from maximum extension to 120° of flexion (P < .001). The BL group also had significantly higher minimum IIP than the other 2 groups when knee flexion was >120° (P < .001). No significant differences were seen in maximum, minimum, or mean IIP between the NI and PR groups.Conclusion:The PR procedure (individualized DB-ACLR) was more consistent with the interbundle biomechanical conditions of the native ACL, whereas the BL procedure (nonindividualized DB-ACLR) had higher maximum and mean IIP. The IIP was higher than the ACL–intercondylar roof or ACL-PCL pressures, and it increased significantly when knee flexion was >120°.Clinical Relevance:These data suggest that surgeons can perform individualized DB-ACLR using preserved remnants for tunnel placement as impingement-free DB-ACLR.

Joint effusion at 6months is a significant predictor of joint effusion 1year after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction.

This study aimed to assess the risk factors for prolonged joint effusion in patients undergoing double-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR). In total, 160 patients who underwent primary ACLR using autograft hamstring between 2015 and 2018 were retrospectively reviewed. Joint effusion was defined as any grade ≥ 2 (range, 0-3) according to the MRI Osteoarthritis Knee Score (MOAKS). Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses were performed. The median age of the patients was 25years (range 14-68years) at the time of the surgery; there were 89 women and 71 men. At 1year, 46 (28.8%) patients experienced knee joint effusion, as defined by the MOAKS. Univariate analysis revealed that age, preoperative Kellgren-Lawrence (K-L) grade, and joint effusion at 6months were significantly associated with joint effusion at 1year. In the multivariate analysis, joint effusion at 6months was significantly associated with joint effusion at 1year (odds ratio, 68.0; 95% confidence interval, 22.1-209.4). No significant difference in the Lysholm scores was observed between patients with and without joint effusion at 1year (n.s.). Joint effusion at 6months was significantly associated with joint effusion 1year after ACLR. III.