Tunnel Reaming Research Articles

Anatomic Popliteus Tendon and Tibiofibular Joint Reconstructions

Background: The popliteus tendon is a primary stabilizer of external knee rotation and has been described as the “fifth ligament of the knee.” Injuries involving the posterolateral corner of the knee commonly involve the popliteus tendon; isolated injury to the popliteus tendon is relatively rare and usually involves a rotatory injury mechanism and symptoms of instability and pain. In this patient, there was a concomitant injury to the proximal tibiofibular joint. Indications: Popliteus tendon reconstruction is indicated for patients with abnormal external rotation on examination and symptoms of pain and instability. Proximal tibiofibular joint reconstruction is indicated for patients with instability of the tibiofibular joint. Technique Description: Preoperative examination under anesthesia is essential to determine the extent of external rotation and assess for additional posterolateral pathology. The popliteus tendon procedure begins with a meticulous common peroneal nerve neurolysis to minimize nerve irritation and decrease the risk of a postoperative foot drop. Semitendinosus and gracilis graft harvest is performed with at least 16 cm of graft length followed by tunnel reaming of the popliteus tendon femoral attachment and tibia tunnel identification and reaming. The femoral attachment of the popliteus tendon is secured, and the semitendinosus graft is anatomically oriented along the native path and passed from posterior to anterior through the femoral tunnel. The gracilis graft for anatomic proximal tibiofibular joint reconstruction requires an anterior to posterior tunnel through the fibular head. Finally, both grafts are secured in the tibial tunnel with the application of an anterior traction force. Results: A cadaveric study by LaPrade et al reported that an anatomic popliteus tendon reconstruction with a semitendinosus autograft significantly reduced external rotation laxity compared with the sectioned state. In addition, popliteus tendon reconstruction resulted in significantly decreased varus laxity, anterior tibial translation, and internal rotation. Discussion: This is a technique that effectively restores external rotation knee stability utilizing an anatomically oriented reconstruction of the popliteus tendon and tibiofibular joint. The popliteus tendon serves as a primary stabilizer to external rotation and facilitates static function of the knee. The proximal tibiofibular joint reconstruction restores the function of the posterior proximal tibiofibular joint ligaments. Patient Consent Disclosure Statement: The author(s) attests that consent has been obtained from any patient(s) appearing in this publication. If the individual may be identifiable, the author(s) has included a statement of release or other written form of approval from the patient(s) with this submission for publication.

Significant race and gender differences in anterior cruciate ligament tibial footprint location: a 3D-based analysis

BackgroundThe aim of the present study was to identify potential race- or gender-specific differences in anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) tibial footprint location from the tibia anatomical coordinate system (tACS) origin, investigate the distances from the tibial footprint to the anterior root of the lateral meniscus (ARLM) and the medial tibial spine (MTS), determine how reliable the ARLM and MTS can be in locating the ACL tibial footprint, and assess the risk of iatrogenic ARLM injuries caused by using reamers with various diameters (7–10 mm).Patients and methodsMagnetic resonance images of 91 Chinese and 91 Caucasian subjects were used for the reconstruction of three-dimensional (3D) tibial and ACL tibial footprint models. The anatomical coordinate system was applied to reflect the anatomical locations of scanned samples.ResultsThe average anteroposterior (A/P) tibial footprint location was 17.1 ± 2.3 mm and 20.0 ± 3.4 mm in Chinese and Caucasians, respectively (P < .001). The average mediolateral (M/L) tibial footprint location was 34.2 ± 2.4 mm and 37.4 ± 3.6 mm in Chinese and Caucasians, respectively (P < .001). The average difference between men and women was 2 mm in Chinese and 3.1 mm in Caucasians. The safe zone for tibial tunnel reaming to avoid ARLM injury was 2.2 mm and 1.9 mm away from the central tibial footprint in the Chinese and Caucasians, respectively. The probability of damaging the ARLM by using reamers with various diameters ranged from 0% for Chinese males with a 7 mm reamer to 30% in Caucasian females with a 10 mm reamer.ConclusionsThe significant race- and gender-specific differences in the ACL tibial footprint should be taken in consideration during anatomic ACL reconstruction. The ARLM and MTS are reliable intraoperative landmarks for identifying the tibial ACL footprint. Caucasians and females might be more prone to iatrogenic ARLM injury.Level of evidence: III, cohort study.Trial registration: This study has been approved by the ethical research committee of the General Hospital of Southern Theater Command of PLA under the code: [2019] No.10.

Effect of Anterior Horn Tears of the Lateral Meniscus on Knee Stability.

Background:Investigations on the biomechanical characteristics of the anterior horn of the lateral meniscus (AHLM) related to anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) tibial tunnel reaming have revealed increased contact pressure between the femur and tibia, decreased attachment area, and decreased ultimate failure strength.Purpose/Hypothesis:The purpose of this study was to investigate the influence of a complete radial tear of the AHLM on force distribution in response to applied anterior and posterior drawer forces and internal and external rotation torques. We hypothesized that the AHLM plays an important role in knee stability, primarily at lower knee flexion angles.Study Design:Controlled laboratory study.Methods:A total of 9 fresh-frozen cadaveric knee specimens and a robotic testing system were used. Anterior and posterior drawer forces up to 89 N and internal and external rotation torques up to 4 N·m were applied at 0°, 30°, 60°, and 90° of knee flexion. A complete AHLM tear was then made 10 mm from the lateral border of the tibial attachment of the ACL, and the same tests performed in the intact state were repeated. Next, the recorded intact knee motion was reproduced in the AHLM-torn knee, and the change in the resultant force after an AHLM tear was determined by calculating the difference between the 2 states.Results:In the torn AHLM, the reduction in the resultant force at 0° for external rotation torque (34.8 N) was larger than that at 60° (5.2 N; P < .01) and 90° (6.7 N; P < .01).Conclusion:The AHLM played a role in facilitating knee stability against an applied posterior drawer force of 89 N and external rotation torque of 4 N·m, especially at lower knee flexion angles.Clinical Relevance:This study provides information about the effects of AHLM injuries that may occur during single-bundle ACL reconstruction using a round tunnel.

Investigation of the Importance of Knee Position during Femoral Tunnel Reaming; Figure 4 versus Hyperflexion.

Introduction:We aimed to compare whether the visualisation provided by arthroscopic hyperflexion and Figure 4 has an effect on femoral tunnel placement in patients undergoing single bundle Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction (ACLR).Material and methods:We retrospectively evaluated 93 patients who underwent single-band ACLR for Anterior Cruciate Ligament (ACL) injury between 2016 and 2019. Eighty patients met the inclusion criteria with a minimum follow-up of 12 months. We divided the patients into Group 1 (figure 4) and Group 2 (hyperflexion). We analysed the demographic, radiological and functional outcomes of the patients. The functional Lysholm score, operative time, radiological Quadrant method (% proximal-distal and % anterior-posterior) measurements, tunnel lengths, axial and coronal plane angles, and iatrogenic chondral injury in the medial femoral condyle were evaluated.Results:Iatrogenic chondral injury developed in the medial femoral condyle in a total of seven patients in both groups: one patient in group 1 (Figure 4) and six patients in group 2 (Hyperflexion). Although statistically insignificant, iatrogenic medial femoral condyle damage was less in group 1. The statistical analysis between surgical operation time (p = 0.046) and tunnel lengths (p = 0.042) was significant.Conclusion:The position of figure 4 provides visualisation of lateral intercondylar notch better than hyperflexion. In the reaming stage, the medial femoral condyle is less damaged in group 1 (Figure 4). In ACLR, which has a long learning curve, short surgery time is seen as an important advantage for surgeons who have just started doing ACLR. We think that it can be used as an alternative method to hyperflexion in the learning process and maybe shorten the learning curve process.

Flexible Versus Rigid Reaming Systems for Independent Femoral Tunnel Reaming During ACL Reconstruction: Minimum 2-Year Clinical Outcomes.

Background:Radiographic and cadaveric studies have suggested that anatomic anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) femoral tunnel drilling with the use of a flexible reaming system through an anteromedial portal (AM-FR) may result in a different graft and femoral tunnel position compared with using a rigid reamer through an accessory anteromedial portal with hyperflexion (AAM-RR). No prior studies have directly compared clinical outcomes between the use of these 2 techniques for femoral tunnel creation during ACLR.Purpose:To compare revision rates at a minimum of 2 years postoperatively for patients who underwent ACLR with AM-FR versus AAM-RR. The secondary objectives were to compare functional testing and patient-reported outcomes between the cohorts.Study Design:Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3.Methods:Included were consecutive patients at a single academic institution between 2013 and 2018 who underwent primary ACLR without additional ligamentous reconstruction. Patients were separated into 2 groups based on the type of anatomic femoral tunnel drilling: AM-FR or AAM-RR. Graft failure, determined by revision ACLR, was assessed with a minimum 2 years of postoperative follow-up. The authors also compared patient-reported outcome scores (International Knee Documentation Committee [IKDC] and Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score [KOOS]) and functional performance testing performed at 6 months postoperatively.Results:A total of 284 (AAM-RR, 232; AM-FR, 52) patients were included. The mean follow-up time was 3.7 ± 1.5 years, with a minimum 2-year follow-up rate of 90%. There was no significant difference in the rate of revision ACLR between the AAM-RR and AM-FR groups (10.8% vs 9.6%, respectively; P = .806). At 6 months postoperatively, there were no significant between-group differences in peak knee extension strength, peak knee flexion strength, limb symmetry indices, or hop testing, as well as no significant differences in IKDC (AAM-RR, 81.1; AM-FR, 78.9; P = .269) or KOOS (AAM-RR, 89.0; AM-FR, 86.7; P = .104).Conclusion:In this limited study, independent femoral tunnel drilling for ACLR using rigid or flexible reaming systems resulted in comparable rates of revision ACLR at a minimum of 2 years postoperatively, with no significant differences in strength assessments or patient-reported outcomes at 6 months postoperatively.

Better Coverage of the ACL Tibial Footprint and Less Injury to the Anterior Root of the Lateral Meniscus Using a Rounded-Rectangular Tibial Tunnel in ACL Reconstruction: A Cadaveric Study.

Background:To better restore the anatomy of the native anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) attachment and fiber arrangement, researchers have developed techniques for changing the shape of the ACL bone tunnel during ACL reconstruction.Purpose:To compare the coverage of the ACL tibial footprint and influence on the anterior root of lateral meniscus (ARLM) between a rounded-rectangular tibial tunnel and a conventional round tibial tunnel for ACL reconstruction.Study Design:Controlled laboratory study.Methods:A total of 16 (8 matched-paired) fresh-frozen human cadaveric knees were distributed randomly into 2 groups: a rounded-rectangular tunnel (RRT) group and a round tunnel (RT) group. One of the knees from each pair was reamed with rounded-rectangular tibial tunnel, whereas the other was reamed with round tibial tunnel. Coverage of the ACL tibial footprint and areas of ARLM attachment before and after reaming were measured using 3-dimensional isotropic magnetic resonance imaging.Results:In the RRT group, the average percentage of ACL tibial footprint covered by the tunnel was 70.8% ± 2.5%, which was significantly higher than that in the RT group (48.2% ± 6.4%) (P = .012). As for the ARLM attachment area, in the RT group, there was a significant decrease (22.5% ± 5.9%) in ARLM attachment area after tibial tunnel reaming compared with the intact state (P < .001). Conversely, in the RRT group, the ARLM attachment area was not significantly affected by tibial tunnel reaming.Conclusion:Rounded-rectangular tibial tunnel was able to better cover the native ACL tibial footprint and significantly lower the risk of iatrogenic injury to the ARLM attachment than round tibial tunnel during ACL reconstruction.

Anteromedial Portal Reference Technique for Femoral Tunnel Depth Measurement During Arthroscopic Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction.

Femoral tunnel preparation during the anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction is a technically demanding step. The anteromedial (AM) portal technique necessitates knee hyperflexion during the femoral tunnel reaming. In a hyperflexed knee, the arthroscopic visualization of the laser markings on the femoral tunnel reamer becomes obscured. Thus, the calculation of the depth of the femoral tunnel becomes difficult. Our technique helps in femoral tunneling reliably without the need for arthroscopic visualization using the AM portal as a reference point to calculate the depth while drilling. This technique can be performed without the need for a second assistant to hold the arthroscope. Furthermore, this technique does not require any specific instruments, and there is no obligation for an additional incision.

Anterior root of lateral meniscus and medial tibial spine are reliable intraoperative landmarks for the tibial footprint of anterior cruciate ligament.

The aims of the present study were (1) to investigate the tibial footprint location of the anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) in both ACL-ruptured and ACL-intact patients, (2) to identify the relationship of the tibial footprint to the anterior root of the lateral meniscus (ARLM) and medial tibial spine (MTS), and (3) to evaluate the reliability of the ARLM and MTS for identifying the center of the tibial ACL footprint. Magnetic resonance images of 90 knees with ACL rupture and 90 matched-controlled knees were used to create three-dimensional models of the tibia. The tibial ACL footprint was outlined on each model, and its location was measured using an anatomical coordinate system. No significant difference in the location of the tibial footprint was found between ACL-ruptured and ACL-intact knees. The tibial ACL footprint was located in very close proximity to the ARLM, especially in the M/L direction. The safe zone of tibial tunnel reaming for avoiding damage to the ARLM was 2.6mm lateral to the center of the native tibial footprint. Both the ARLM and MTS were reliable intraoperative landmarks for identifying the tibial footprint. Orthopedic surgeons should be aware of the safe zone of tibial tunnel reaming for avoiding injury to the ARLM. Both the ARLM and MTS might be reliable landmarks for identifying the center of the tibial ACL footprint and may facilitate tibial tunnel placement during anatomical single-bundle ACL reconstruction, especially in cases of revision where the tibial ACL stump is not available. Level III.

Can Anatomic Posterolateral Corner Reconstruction Using a Fibular Tunnel Restore Fibular Footprints of the Posterolateral Complex? A Cadaveric Study

This study aimed to (1) quantitatively analyze the fibular footprints of the lateral collateral ligament (LCL) and popliteofibular ligament (PFL) and (2) evaluate whether a fibular tunnel can restore the LCL and PFL fibular footprints simultaneously without modification in anatomic posterolateral corner reconstruction of the knee. In 20 cadaveric knees, anatomic characteristics, such as diameter, location and relationship with anatomic landmarks, of the LCL and PFL footprints were analyzed. Subsequently, a fibular tunnel that connected the LCL and PFL footprint centers was created with 1.5 mm drill bit, and tunnel depth, which is defined as the distance between the tunnel and the nearest cortex, was evaluated. An additional tunnel from the anteroinferior border of the LCL footprint to the posteroinferior border of the PFL footprint was created, and its tunnel depth was evaluated as well and compared with that of the original tunnel. The LCL footprint was longitudinally ovoid (8.4 ± 1.0× 13 ± 1.0 mm), and its inferior margin corresponded well with the lateral apex of the fibula (distance, 1.0 ± 0.7 mm). The PFL footprint was round (9.7 ± 1.3× 9.0±1.1 mm), and its center was very close to the tip of the fibular styloid process (1.2 ± 0.8 mm). The tunnel depth of the original fibular tunnel was 1.8 ± 0.7 mm, and it was very shallow for tunnel reaming. On the contrary, the tunnel depth of the modified fibular tunnel (6.4 ± 1.1 mm) was significantly higher than that of the original tunnel (P < 0.05), and it was relatively safe for tunnel reaming. A single fibular tunnel cannot reproduce the LCL and PFL footprint centers simultaneously because the trajectory is too close to the cortex. A modified fibular tunnel, using the margins of the footprints, is recommended to avoid cortical blowout. A modified fibular tunnel that covers only portions of the LCL and PFL footprints, from the anteroinferior LCL footprint to the posteroinferior PFL footprint, is less likely to blow out the lateral fibula than is a similar tunnel using the anatomic footprint centers.

Lateral location of the tibial tunnel increases lateral meniscal extrusion after anatomical single-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction

IntroductionThe tibial footprint of the anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) overlaps with the anterior lateral meniscal root (ALMR), and there is a possibility that an anatomical tibial tunnel reaming might damage the attachment of ALMR. The aim of this study was to investigate the relationship between tibial tunnel location and lateral meniscal extrusion (LME) after anatomical single-bundle ACL reconstruction.MethodsA prospectively collected database and associated intraoperative findings for 153 patients undergoing primary anatomical ACL reconstruction between October 2014 and July 2016 were investigated. Those cases with no meniscal injury seen at surgery and meeting the criteria (52/153) were included. Tibial plateau length (TPL), width (TPW), tibial tunnel location and LME were evaluated from postoperative high-resolution MRI. The location of the centre of the tibial tunnel was evaluated by the position relative to the medial tibial eminence with two measures, the medial–lateral distance (MLD) and anterior–posterior distance. These measures were expressed as a percentage of the TPW and TPL, respectively. The LME was also expressed as a percentage of TPW and correlated with tibial tunnel location.ResultsThere was a positive correlation between percentage of LME (%LME) and percentage of MLD (%MLD) (r=0.478; p<0.001). Applying receiver operating characteristic analysis, we determined that a cut-off value of 4 %MLD was significant. The mean percentage of LME was 1.20 for >4 %MLD, compared with 0.17 for ≤4 %MLD (p<0.001). No significant correlation was found between %LME and clinical outcomes at 1-year follow-up.ConclusionLateral location of the tibial tunnel increases the rate of LME after single-bundle ACL reconstruction.Level of evidenceLevel IV, Case series.

The Lavender Fertilized Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: A Quadriceps Tendon All-Inside Reconstruction Fertilized With Bone Marrow Concentrate, Demineralized Bone Matrix, and Autograft Bone

The use of biologics in sports medicine is increasing rapidly. Bone marrow concentrate has recently increased in popularity because it includes mesenchymal stem cells which, combined with AlloSync Pure, could lead to better incorporation and healing. The mixture of bone marrow concentrate and Allosync Pure can be used in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. We recently expanded on this approach with the addition of saving the host bone normally lost from tunnel reaming, using the GraftNet. After harvesting the autograft bone, we combine it with the AlloSync Pure and bone marrow concentrate. In this Technical Note, we show how this unique biologic composite is obtained and then added back into the tunnels on both the femur and tibia during a quadriceps tendon autograft all-inside anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction.

Anatomical relationship between insertion sites, tunnel placement, and lateral meniscus anterior horn injury during single and double bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstructions: A comparative macroscopic and histopathological evaluation in cadavers

PurposeThe influence of tunnel extension outside the anatomical anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) insertion in single-bundle (SB) or double-bundle (DB) ACL reconstruction is unclear. This study aimed to investigate the anatomical relationship between ACL insertion and tunnel extension in SB and DB ACL reconstruction, and the impact of tibial tunnel extension to the insertion of anterior horn of lateral meniscus in terms of injury. MethodsForty-six paired cadaver knees (mean age, 82.7 ± 10.7 years) were used. Right and left knees were used for SB (10 mm) and DB tunnel reaming (6 mm for the anteromedial and posterolateral bundles). Tibial and femoral tunnels were created to aim at the center of the ACL insertion by arthroscopic visualization. The relationship between tunnel extension and ACL insertion was evaluated macroscopically, and there ratio in two groups were compared by chi-square test. Further, the relative risk for meniscus injury based on tunnel placement was estimated. Coronal section of tibia and parallel section to Blumensaat line in femur were prepared to evaluate the relationship among tunnel position, ACL insertion, and anterior horn of the meniscus histologically. ResultsTibial tunnel extension out of the ACL insertion was observed macroscopically in 9 (39.1%) knees of the SB group, and 3 (13.0%) of the DB group (p = 0.045). In femoral tunnels, extension out of the ACL insertion was seen in 8 (34.8%) knees of the SB group and 1 (4.3%) of the DB group (p = 0.011). Partial injuries of the lateral meniscus anterior horn (LMAH) were observed in 5 (21.7%) knees of the SB group and 1 (4.3%) knee of the DB group (p = 0.091). The relative risk for LMAH injury was calculated as 5.0 (odds ratio, 6.1). Microscopically, SB tunnels appeared to expand out of ACL insertion, both in the femur and tibia. ConclusionsThe incidence of tunnel extension out of the ACL insertion in femur and tibia were higher with SB than with DB reconstruction. Furthermore, injury rate of the LMAH in the DB group was lower.

Inside-out Meniscal Repairs in the Setting of Multiligament Reconstruction in the Knee: Does Meniscal Repair Affect Outcomes and Failure Rates?

Objectives:The purpose of this study was to assess outcomes and failure rates of meniscal repair in patients who underwent multiligament reconstruction compared to patients who underwent multiligament reconstruction but lacked meniscal tears. We hypothesized that the outcomes of meniscal repair associated with a concomitant multiligament reconstruction would significantly improve from preoperatively to postoperatively at a minimum of 2 years following the index surgery. Secondarily, we hypothesized that this cohort would demonstrate similar outcomes and failure rates compared to the cohort who did not have meniscal pathology at the time of multiligament reconstruction.Methods:Inclusion criteria for the study included radiographically confirmed skeletally mature patients over 16 years of age who underwent multiligamentous reconstruction of the knee without previous ipsilateral osteotomy, intraarticular infection, or fracture. Patients were included in the experimental group if they underwent inside-out meniscus suture repair with a concurrent multiligament reconstruction. Those included in the control group (multiligament reconstruction without a meniscal tear) underwent multiligament reconstruction, but did not have any type of meniscal surgery. Lysholm, WOMAC, SF-12 PCS and MCS, Tegner Activity scale and patient satisfaction were recorded preoperatively and postoperatively. Failure of the meniscal repair was defined as a re-tear of the meniscus that was confirmed arthroscopically.Results:There were 43 patients (16 females, 27 males) in the meniscal repair group and 62 patients in the control group (25 females, 37 males). Follow-up was obtained in 93% of patients with an average follow-up of 3.0 years (range, 2.0 to 4.7 years). There was a significant improvement between all preoperative and postoperative outcome scores (p<.05) for both groups. The multiligament plus meniscal repair group had significantly lower preoperative Lysholm and Tegner scores (p=0.009, p=0.02, respectively). There were no significant differences between any other outcome score at preoperative status. There was no significant difference in any postoperative outcome score at a minimum two-year follow up between the two groups.Conclusion:Good to excellent patient reported outcomes were reported for both groups with no significant differences in outcomes between cohorts. Additionally, the failure rate for an inside-out meniscal repair with a concomitant multiligament reconstruction was low, regardless of meniscus laterality and tear characteristics. The use of multiple vertical mattress sutures and the biological augmentation resulting from intra-articular cruciate ligament reconstruction tunnel reaming may be partially responsible for the stability of the meniscus repair construct and thereby contribute to the overall improved outcomes and a low failure rate of meniscal repair despite lower preoperative Lysholm and Tegner scores in the meniscal repair group.

Does anatomic single-bundle ACL reconstruction using hamstring autograft produce anterolateral meniscal root tearing?

BackgroundTo determine if tibial tunnel reaming during anatomic single-bundle anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction using hamstring autograft can result in anterolateral meniscal root injury, as diagnosed by magnetic resonance imaging (MRI).MethodsA case series of 104 primary anatomic single-bundle ACL reconstructions using hamstring autograft was retrospectively reviewed. Pre- and post-operative (>1 year) MRIs were radiologically evaluated for each patient, with a lateral meniscus extrusion > 3 mm at the level of the medial collateral ligament midportion on a coronal MRI, to establish anterolateral meniscal root injury.ResultsNo patients presented radiological findings of anterolateral meniscal root injury in this case series.ConclusionsExamining a single-bundle ACL reconstruction technique using hamstring autograft that considered tibial tunnel positioning in the center of the tibial footprint, this case series found no evidence of anterolateral meniscal root injury in patient MRIs, even more than 1-year post-operation.

Outcomes of Inside-out Meniscal Repair in the Setting of Multiligament Reconstruction in the Knee

Background: Limited evidence exists for meniscal repair outcomes in a multiligament reconstruction setting. Purpose/Hypothesis: The purpose of this study was to assess outcomes and failure rates of meniscal repair in patients who underwent multiligament reconstruction compared with patients who underwent multiligament reconstruction but lacked meniscal tears. The authors hypothesized that the outcomes of meniscal repair associated with concomitant multiligament reconstruction would significantly improve from preoperatively to postoperatively at a minimum of 2 years after the index surgery. Secondarily, they hypothesized that this cohort would demonstrate similar outcomes and failure rates compared with the cohort that did not have meniscal lesions at the time of multiligament reconstruction. Study Design: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. Methods: Inclusion criteria for the study included radiographically confirmed skeletally mature patients of at least 16 years of age who underwent multiligamentous reconstruction of the knee without previous ipsilateral osteotomy, intra-articular infections, or intra-articular fractures. Patients were included in the experimental group if they underwent inside-out meniscal suture repair with concurrent multiligament reconstruction. Those included in the control group (multiligament reconstruction without a meniscal tear) underwent multiligament reconstruction but did not undergo any type of meniscal surgery. Lysholm, Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index, Short Form–12 physical component summary and mental component summary, Tegner activity scale, and patient satisfaction scores were recorded preoperatively and postoperatively. The failure of meniscal repair was defined as a retear of the meniscus that was confirmed arthroscopically. Results: There were 43 patients (16 female, 27 male) in the meniscal repair group and 62 patients (25 female, 37 male) in the control group. Follow-up was obtained in 93% of patients with a mean of 3.0 years (range, 2.0-4.7 years). There was a significant improvement between all preoperative and postoperative outcome scores (P < .05) for both groups. The meniscal repair group had significantly lower preoperative Lysholm and Tegner scores (P = .009 and P = .02, respectively). There were no significant differences between any other outcome scores preoperatively. The failure rate of the meniscal repair group was 2.7%, consisting of 1 symptomatic meniscal retear. There was no significant difference in any postoperative outcome score at a minimum 2-year follow-up between the 2 groups. Conclusion: Good to excellent patient-reported outcomes were reported for both groups with no significant differences in outcomes between the cohorts. Additionally, the failure rate for inside-out meniscal repair with concomitant multiligament reconstruction was low, regardless of meniscus laterality and tear characteristics. The use of multiple vertical mattress sutures and the biological augmentation resulting from intra-articular cruciate ligament reconstruction tunnel reaming may be partially responsible for the stability of the meniscal repair construct and thereby contribute to the overall improved outcomes and the low failure rate of meniscal repair, despite lower preoperative Lysholm and Tegner scores in the meniscal repair group.

Consequences of Tibial Tunnel Reaming on the Meniscal Roots During Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction in a Cadaveric Model, Part 2

Background: Recent emphasis has turned to reconstructing the posterior cruciate ligament (PCL) after injury. However, single-bundle PCL reconstruction of the anterolateral bundle may potentially injure the posterior meniscal roots. Purpose/Hypothesis: The purpose of this study was to determine if posterior meniscal root injuries occurred because of tunnel reaming for single-bundle PCL reconstruction. It was hypothesized that tibial tunnel reaming within the anterolateral bundle footprint during PCL reconstruction would result in clinically significant decreases in posteromedial (PM) root attachment areas and in ultimate failure strength for the PM root. Study Design: Controlled laboratory study. Methods: Testing was performed on 12 matched pairs of human cadaveric knees. For each pair of knees, one knee was left intact, while the contralateral knee was prepared with a tibial tunnel placed 5 mm anterior to the center of the tibial PCL attachment and within the previously described footprint of the anterolateral bundle of the PCL for single-bundle PCL reconstruction. The attachment areas of the posterior meniscal roots were measured with a coordinate measuring device before and after PCL tunnel reaming. The posterior meniscal roots were then pulled to failure with a dynamic tensile testing machine. Results: There was a significant mean decrease in the attachment area of the PM root (%Δ, 28%; 95% CI, 16-40) after PCL tunnel reaming compared with the intact state (P = .005). The mean ultimate failure strength of the native PM root (mean, 440 N; 95% CI, 347-534) was also significantly stronger (mean, 40%; 95% CI, 18-61; P = .005) than that of the PM root after PCL tunnel reaming (mean, 243 N; 95% CI, 176-309). No changes were found for the posterolateral (PL) root after PCL tunnel reaming. Conclusion: Tibial tunnel reaming for single-bundle PCL reconstruction in the anterolateral bundle footprint significantly reduced the ultimate failure strength and attachment area of the PM meniscal root. The attachment area and ultimate failure strength of the PL root were unaffected by tunnel reaming. Clinical Relevance: Tibial tunnels reamed in the footprint of the anterolateral bundle during single-bundle PCL reconstruction can cause iatrogenic damage to the PM meniscal root attachment. Thus, tibial tunnels should strive to be reamed in the center of the entire tibial PCL attachment site during PCL reconstruction.

Consequences of Tibial Tunnel Reaming on the Meniscal Roots During Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction in a Cadaveric Model, Part 1

Background: The current standard for treating complete tears of the anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) is reconstruction, which requires reaming a tibial tunnel. Based on recent anatomic and biomechanical studies, this reconstruction tunnel may cause injuries to the anterior meniscal root attachments. Purpose/Hypothesis: The purpose was to determine if injuries occurred to the anteromedial (AM) and anterolateral (AL) meniscal root attachments because of reaming a tibial reconstruction tunnel in the anatomic center of the ACL footprint. It was hypothesized that tibial tunnel reaming for ACL reconstruction would result in significant decreases in the attachment area and in ultimate failure strength for the AL root. Study Design: Controlled laboratory study. Methods: Twelve matched pairs of human cadaveric knees were tested. One knee from each pair remained intact, while the contralateral knee was reamed with a tibial tunnel for an anatomic ACL reconstruction. The attachment areas of the anterior meniscal roots were measured with a coordinate measuring device before and after tunnel reaming. The anterior meniscal roots were then pulled to failure with a dynamic tensile testing machine. Results: There was a significant mean decrease in the attachment area for the AL root (%Δ, 38%; 95% CI, 25-51) after ACL tunnel reaming compared with the intact state (P = .003). The mean ultimate failure strength of the native AL root (mean, 610 N; 95% CI, 470-751) was significantly stronger (P = .015) than that of the AL root with a reamed ACL reconstruction tunnel (mean, 506 N; 95% CI, 353-659). Tunnel reaming did not significantly affect the AM root attachment area or ultimate failure strength. Conclusion: Tibial tunnel reaming during anatomic single-bundle ACL reconstruction significantly decreased the AL meniscal root attachment area and ultimate failure strength. The AM root was not significantly affected by reaming of the ACL reconstruction tunnel. Future studies should investigate the clinical importance of these iatrogenic injuries to the AL root. Clinical Relevance: The ACL reconstruction tunnels reamed in the center of the ACL tibial footprint caused a significant decrease in the attachment area and ultimate strength of the AL meniscal root attachment. Clinically, repositioning guide pins placed in the lateral aspect of the ACL attachment before tibial tunnel reaming may minimize iatrogenic injuries to the AL meniscal root attachment.

A Modified Transtibial Pull-Out Repair for Posterior Root Avulsions of the Lateral Meniscus with Concomitant Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: A Report of Two Cases.

This case series describes the surgical technique for and outcomes after a modified transtibial pull-out repair for posterior root avulsions of the lateral meniscus. This modified technique is designed to prevent tunnel convergence during a concomitant or staging of an anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction. Promising short-term clinical outcomes were seen at the two-year follow-up for both patients. On second-look arthroscopy, one patient also demonstrated excellent healing. Results provide preliminary evidence suggesting that this technique may (1) facilitate anatomic healing of the root and (2) allow for concomitant or staged ACL reconstruction tunnel reaming.

Effect of Reamer Design on Posteriorization of the Tibial Tunnel During Endoscopic Transtibial Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction

Background: It is known that small alterations in tunnel positioning during anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction significantly affect ACL length and tensioning patterns as well as alter force vectors and joint kinematics. Purpose: To compare the amount of inadvertent posteriorization of the ACL tibial tunnel anatomy during transtibial ACL femoral reaming in the “over-the-top” position with a full femoral reamer versus a half femoral reamer, in comparison to the native tibial ACL footprint. It is hypothesized that the half reamer will result in less distortion of tibial tunnel anatomy and improved anatomic footprint coverage. It is also hypothesized that the true center of the tibial ACL footprint lies more anterior than previously described. Study Design: Controlled laboratory study. Methods: Eight cadaveric knee specimens were securely fixed to a stationary table at 90° of flexion and neutral rotation. After removal of the anterior capsule and patella, native joint anatomy was precisely recorded with a digitizer accurate to 0.05 mm. Tibial and femoral tunnels were then drilled in the manner of transtibial ACL reconstructions using the optimal tibial starting point of 15.9 mm below the medial plateau and 9.8 mm posteromedial to the medial margin of the tibial tubercle. After the 11-mm tibial tunnel was drilled, femoral tunnels were first drilled with a 10-mm half-fluted reamer, followed by a 10-mm full reamer. Each tibial tunnel’s location and geometry relative to the native ligamentous insertion sites and joint anatomy were digitized. Results: Digitized measurements of ACL insertional anatomy demonstrated that the center of the native ACL tibial footprint was 2.0 ± 0.49 mm (range, 1.1-2.7 mm) anterior to the posterior aspect of the lateral meniscus’ anterior horn. Use of the 10-mm full femoral reamer resulted in a tibial-articular aperture that had a posterior edge 4.35 mm more posterior (P = .049) and extra-anatomic (P = .006) than the footprint of the 10-mm half femoral reamer. Conclusion: Half-fluted reamers may be more advantageous for femoral tunnel reaming with a more oblique transtibial approach, as they result in less posterior tibial tunnel expansion than full reamers, possibly leading to improved graft function. Based on the digitized anatomy, the center of the tibial attachment site is anterior to the posterior aspect of the lateral mensicus’s anterior horn, which has been traditionally described as the anatomic center. Clinical Relevance: Use of half-fluted reamers for transtibial femoral tunnel reaming could lead to more anatomic tunnel placement and possibly improved graft mechanics after transtibial single-bundle ACL reconstruction.

The use of intra-operative fluoroscopy for tibial tunnel placement in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction.

ObjectivesOur aim was to assess the use of intra-operative fluoroscopy in the assessment of the position of the tibial tunnel during reconstruction of the anterior cruciate ligament (ACL).MethodsBetween January and June 2009 a total of 31 arthroscopic hamstring ACL reconstructions were performed. Intra-operative fluoroscopy was introduced (when available) to verify the position of the guidewire before tunnel reaming. It was only available for use in 20 cases, due to other demands on the radiology department. The tourniquet times were compared between the two groups and all cases where radiological images lead to re-positioning of the guide wire were recorded. The secondary outcome involved assessing the tibial interference screw position measured on post-operative radiographs and comparing with the known tunnel position as shown on intra-operative fluoroscopic images.ResultsOf the 20 patients treated with fluoroscopy, the imaging led to repositioning of the tibial guide wire before reaming in three (15%). The mean tourniquet time with intra-operative fluoroscopy was 56 minutes (44 to 70) compared with 51 minutes (42 to 67) for the operations performed without. Six patients (30%) had post-operative screw positions that were > 5% more posterior than the known position of the tibial tunnel.ConclusionIntra-operative fluoroscopy can be effectively used to improve the accuracy of tibial tunnel positions with minimal increase in tourniquet time. This study also demonstrates the potential inaccuracy associated with plain radiological assessment of tunnel position.