Outcomes of retro-drilled all-inside tibial tunnel vs complete tibial tunnel techniques in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction-a comparative study

All-Inside Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction Had Clinical Outcome Similar to the Transtibial Technique Except for Improved Side-to-Side Difference and Tegner Activity Scale: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

PURPOSE

To compare clinical outcomes of the all-inside technique with the transtibial technique in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction based on available literature on this topic.

METHODS

According to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses checklist, we conducted a systematic search for randomized controlled trials and cohort studies. Our comprehensive search encompassed PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science. We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and cohort studies that compared the 2 techniques with a minimal 1-year follow-up. Two independent authors assessed RCTs using the risk of bias tool developed by the Cochrane Collaboration and evaluated the quality of cohort studies using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale for Assessing the Quality of Nonrandomized Comparative Trials. The subjective and objective outcomes, complications, and graft failure were obtained. R software was used to perform the analysis.

RESULTS

The present analysis enrolled 9 RCTs (n = 687) and 11 cohort studies (n = 910). After a minimal 1-year follow-up in RCTs, functional outcomes such as International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) subjective score, Lysholm score, Tegner activity scale, Knee Society Score, and hop test were found to be similar between 2 techniques. The laxity outcomes, including the IKDC objective grade and pivot-shift test, were suggested to be comparable. There was a significant difference favoring the transtibial technique in terms of side-to-side difference (P = .04; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.08-0.90). The pooled data from cohort studies indicated equivalent results in terms of IKDC subjective score, Lysholm score, side-to-side difference, IKDC objective grade, complications, and graft failure, with the exception of statistical difference in the Tegner activity scale (P = .03; 95% CI, -0.50 to -0.04).

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings suggest that there is no difference in most outcome scores between the all-inside and transtibial techniques for anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. There are statistically significant differences in side-to-side difference and Tegner activity scale favoring the all-inside technique.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level IV, meta-analysis of Level I to IV studies.

Comparison of the retear rate 2years after ACL reconstruction with the Tape Locking Screw short graft system and the STG technique: A case control study with propensity score matching

PURPOSE

Theoretically, short semitendinosus grafts result in less pain and morbidity while providing greater knee flexion strength and sparing the gracilis tendon. They often require the use of blind bone tunnels as well as fixation at both ends of the graft with suspensory cortical buttons. The "Tape Locking Screw" (TLS) system is another option. There are few studies comparing ACL reconstruction with a short graft using the 4-strand semitendinosus graft (ST4-TLS) technique with that of the semitendinosus-gracilis (STG) procedure. This study was designed: (1) to compare the retear rate following these two technics after 2years of follow-up, (2) to compare the clinical scores, complications and return to sport times between the two procedures Q1, Q2.

HYPOTHESIS

Our hypothesis was that there would be no differences in retear rates between the two techniques.

METHODS

This single center case control study included 290 patients who underwent STG reconstruction that were paired by propensity score matching to 299 patients who underwent ST4-TLS reconstruction. The main evaluation criterion was the retear rate 2years after surgery. Secondary criteria were the two-year postoperative complication rate, the time to return to sport, to pivot sports and to running, as well as the complication rates and clinical scores 6months, 1year and 2years after surgery.

RESULTS

At the final follow-up, the overall retear rate in our series of ACL ligament reconstruction was 6.0% (36/596). There was no difference in retear rates between the groups 2years after ligament reconstruction [ST4-TLS: 6.7% (20/299) vs. STG: 5.4% (16/297); p=0.47]. The postoperative KOOS symptom score and the Tegner score were found to be better in the STG group at 1year (81 vs. 78, p=0.008) and 2years (5.64 vs. 5.10, p=0.016), respectively, representing the minimally clinically important difference (MCID) for the latter. No difference was found in the other clinical scores 6months, 1year or 2years after surgery. There was no significant difference in the return to sport [TLS: 93.0% (164/299) vs. STG: 93.0% (158/297) p=0.99] or the complication rate [TLS: 8.7% (26/299) vs. STG: 7.4% (22/297) p=0.89] between the groups.

DISCUSSION

The ST4-TLS ACL ligament reconstruction technique was found to be as reliable as the standard STG procedure 2years after surgery for the retear rate and the return to sport, although the results of certain postoperative clinical scores seem to be lower.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

III; case control study.

Comparison of the Clinical Outcomes between All-inside and Standard Technique in Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction with 6-strand Hamstring Tendon Autograft

OBJECTIVE

All-inside and standard techniques with 4-strand hamstrings graft have been widely used in anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction. However, the graft diameter of less than 8 mm will significantly increase the rate of surgical failure, and the 6-strand graft can solve this problem. The purpose of this study is to compare all-inside ACL reconstruction using suspensory cortical button fixation on both tibia and femur with standard ACL reconstruction using suspensory femoral fixation and a bioabsorbable tibial interference screw with a 6-strand hamstring tendon autograft in postoperative clinical outcomes.

METHODS

From January 2020 to December 2020, 48 patients performed ACL reconstruction were divided into the all-side group and the standard group according to the different surgical techniques. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and subjective function scores was used to assess clinical outcomes at least 24 months following ACL reconstruction. MRI was used to measure the value of bone tunnel widening in articular and middle portions. Subjective function scores included the Lysholm knee score, the International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) score, the Knee Society Score (KSS) for pain and function, and KT-1000. The t-test was used assuming the distribution of the patients which follows the normal distribution and we used non-parametric tests if these two conditions were not satisfied.

RESULTS

At the final follow-up, there were 22 patients in the all-inside group and 24 patients in the standard group. No significant differences were found with respect to femoral tunnel widening and subjective function scores. However, a significant increase in tibial tunnel widening was found in the middle portion of the standard group (2.25 ± 0.74) compared to the all-inside group (0.76 ± 0.24) (p < 0.01) and also in the articular portion of the standard group (2.07 ± 0.77) compared to the all-inside group (1.52 ± 0.54) (p = 0.02). In addition, the value of the KT-1000 was 1.81 ± 0.45 for the all-inside group and 2.12 ± 0.44 in the standard group (p = 0.016).

CONCLUSION

The objective stability of the knee was relatively better in the all-inside group than in the standard group. And tunnel widening after ACL reconstruction was significantly greater in the standard technique when compared to the all-inside technique on the tibia side.

A Surgical Technique for Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction Using Semitendinosus Graft: An All-Inside Transfemoral Approach

Given the paucity of reports on all-inside reconstruction procedures via the transfemoral approach, we describe a minimally invasive, all-inside transfemoral technique that enables creating femoral and tibial sockets from the intra-articular cavity. Our transfemoral approach makes it possible to sequentially create femoral and tibial sockets using the same reamer bit, while a single drilling guide is set in place. Our custom socket drilling guide was designed to integrate with a tibial tunnel guide, which helped locate the tunnel exit at an anatomically acceptable location. The advantages of this method include easy and precise positioning of the femoral tunnel, narrow tibial tunnel, minimal damage to the intramedullary trabecular bone integrity, and low postoperative risks of pain, bleeding, and infections.

All-inside versus complete tibial tunnel techniques in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

All-inside anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) is a novel technique that has gained attention due to its minimally invasive. However, evidence surrounding the efficacy and safety between all-inside and complete tibial tunnel ACLR are lacking. Present work was aimed to compare clinical outcome for ACLR performed with an all-inside versus a complete tibial tunnel technique.

METHODS

Systematic searches were conducted of published literature on PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane for studies according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines up to May 10, 2022. The outcomes included KT-1000 arthrometer ligament laxity test, International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) subjective score, Lysholm score, Tegner activity scale, and Knee Society Score (KSS) Scale, and tibial tunnel widening. Complications of interest extracted were graft re-ruptures and evaluated the graft re-rupture rate. Data from published RCTs meeting inclusion criteria were extracted and analyzed, and all the extracted data are pooled and analyzed by RevMan 5.3.

RESULTS

A total of 8 randomized controlled trials involving 544 patients (consisting of 272 all-inside and 272 complete tibial tunnel patients) were included in the meta-analysis. We found clinical outcomes (International Knee Documentation Committee [IKDC] subjective score: mean difference [MD], 2.22; 95% CI, 0.23-4.22; p = 0.03; Lysholm score: MD, 1.09; 95% CI, 0.25-1.93; p = 0.01; Tegner activity scale: MD, 0.41; 95% CI, 0.11-0.71; p < 0.01; Tibial Tunnel Widening: MD = - 1.92; 95% CI, - 3.58 to - 0.25; p = 0.02; knee laxity: MD = 0.66; 95% CI, 0.12-1.20; p = 0.02; and graft re-rupture rate: RR, 1.97;95% CI, 0.50-7.74; P = 0.33) in the all-inside and complete tibial tunnel group. The findings also indicated that all-inside may be more advantageous in tibial tunnel healing.

CONCLUSION

Our meta-analysis indicated that the all-inside ACLR was superior to complete tibial tunnel ACLR in functional outcomes and tibial tunnel widening. However, the all-inside ACLR was not entirely superior to complete tibial tunnel ACLR in knee laxity measured, and graft re-rupture rate.

Short graft anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: Current concepts

Short graft anterior cruciate igament reconstruction is increasing in popularity for performing a primary ACLR. The short graft coupled with the all-inside technique using closed sockets and suspensory fixation at both femoral and tibial ends are its defining features. The outcomes of this technique have been comparable to well established transportal ACLR techniques. It has the benefits of preserved hamstring strength and less pain attributed to transtibial drilling. However, there is a learning curve involved and will require time before mastery of the technique. Furthermore, in combined osteotomy or multiligament surgery, the use of short graft anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction with sockets preserve bone stock and the single tendon harvest spares the other tendons for use in other ligament reconstruction.

All-Inside Tibial Tunnel Drilling: How to Calculate a Safe Drilling Length to Avoid Anterior Cortex Violation

The all-inside technique for bone tunnel drilling during ligament reconstruction procedures (ACL, PCL etc.) is gaining popularity as a bone preserving, less invasive technique with the potential for more rapid recovery. To preserve the advantages of closed-socket tunnels, it is essential not to violate the cortex during retro-drilling. The risk of cortical breach is higher with the tibial tunnel compared to the femoral one due to the obliquity of the tunnel relative to the cortex. Our purpose is to introduce a trigonometric formula, which allows the surgeon to calculate the safe tibial tunnel drilling length during all-inside ligament reconstruction and explain its proof.

Combined femoral-obturator-sciatic nerve block has superior postoperative pain score and earlier ambulation as compared to spinal anaesthesia for arthroscopic anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction

PURPOSE

Peripheral nerve blocks can be a suitable alternative to central neuraxial blockage, as the sole anaesthetic agent for better early postoperative outcomes, decreased hospital stay and earlier mobilisation after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) surgery. The purpose of this study was to compare consciousness during the procedure, pain during early postoperative period (< 7 days), and perioperative outcomes following ACLR using combined sciatic, femoral, and obturator nerve blocks compared to the spinal anaesthesia.

METHODS

This was a prospective case-control study including patients between 18 and 55 years of age, with anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injury confirmed clinically and radiologically and undergoing ACLR. Patients were allocated in the two groups alternatively, group 1 included patients who received combined nerve blocks, and group 2 included patients who received spinal anaesthesia for the surgery. The sensory effect, motor effect, adequacy of anaesthesia, perioperative analgesic use, duration of stay, postoperative pain (visual analogue scale 0-10 cm) and functional outcomes were noted.

RESULTS

There were 60 patients in each group. A total of seven patients in group 1 (11%) and two patients in group 2 (3%) needed conversion to general anaesthesia (n.s.). In group 1, out of 53 patients who underwent surgery, 26 patients had no perception of surgery in the joint, 17 patients had perception of manipulation of the knee joint, 4 patients had sense of touch, and 6 patients had sensation of pain in the knee (VAS scale less than 3). In group 2, out of 58 patients, 42 patients had no perception of surgery, 12 had a perception of manipulation of the knee joint, 2 had sense of touch, and 2 had sensation of pain in the knee. Blockage of sensory effect was significantly better in group 2 (p = 0.0001). However, the motor effect was comparable between the two groups (n.s.). Group 1 had significantly better pain scores 6, 12, and 18 h after the surgery. Moreover, patients in group 1 also had faster ambulation (mean difference of 5.5 h, p = 0.0001) and reduced hospital stay (mean difference of 8.4 h, p = 0.0001).

CONCLUSION

Combined sciatic, femoral, and adductor canal block is an effective sole anaesthetic modality for ACLR. The sensory effect was inferior when compared to spinal anaesthesia but sufficient for the procedure without the need for supplementation with any other anaesthetic modality. Patients receiving this combined nerve block had lesser early postoperative pain scores, earlier ambulation, and shorter hospital stay as compared to the spinal anaesthesia.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level 3.

Joint awareness and return to pre-injury level of activities after ACL reconstruction in athletes vs non-athletes

PURPOSE

The outcome of arthroscopic anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) in the non-athlete population is under-reported. The study aimed to compare the functional outcomes of ACLR in the non-athlete and athlete population by patient reported outcome measures (PROMs)- International Knee Documentation Committee score (IKDC), Lysholm knee scoring scale, Forgotten joint score (FJS-12) and return to pre-injury activity level. The study also correlated the FJS-12 score with other commonly used PROM's (IKDC and Lysholm).

METHODS

This was a prospective comparative study including patients undergoing ACLR. Patients were divided into two groups. Group-1 (non-athletes) and Group-2 (athletes, defined as those with pre-injury Tegner activity level > 5). Demographic profile, management of associated meniscal injury, perioperative and midterm complications were noted. All patients had 24 months follow-up. Knee laxity assessment by pivot shift test, functional outcome scores (Lysholm and IKDC) and FJS-12 were assessed preoperatively and postoperatively at 12 and 24 months.

RESULTS

Group 1 and 2 included 69 and 47 participants, respectively, (total 116 patients). The mean age of group 1 was significantly higher than group 2 (33.1 ± 8.0 vs 25.0 ± 4.9 years; p < 0.005). There was no statistically significant difference in PROMs and FJS-12 scores between the groups at any follow-up. Return to pre-injury Tegner activity level post-ACLR was 88.4% (n = 61) and 46.8% (n = 22) in group 1 and 2, respectively (p). The ceiling effect in FJS-12, IKDC, and Lysholm scores were achieved by 9.3%, 19.5%, and 34.7% of patients (n = 116), respectively, at 2-year follow-up. The ceiling effect of FJS-12, Lysholm, and IKDC scores between the groups at final follow-up was not statistically significant (p = 1, p = .524, p = .09, respectively).

CONCLUSION

The functional outcome of ACLR was comparable between athletes and non-athletes. FJS-12 has a lower ceiling effect and better discriminatory power than Lysholm and IKDC scores. FJS-12 score can be satisfactorily used in ACLR to observe and monitor changes in patient satisfaction and outcome.

LEVEL OF STUDY

II, Prospective comparative study.