ACL Reconstruction Graft Angle and Outcomes: Transtibial vs Anteromedial Reconstruction

Clinical Outcomes of a Novel Hybrid Transtibial Technique for Femoral Tunnel Drilling in Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: A Large Single-Center Case Series With a Minimum 2-Year Follow-up

Background

A novel hybrid transtibial (HTT) approach to femoral tunnel drilling in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) has been developed that circumvents the need for knee hyperflexion and orients the graft in the most anatomic position without sacrificing the tunnel length or aperture.

Hypothesis

Patients who underwent ACLR utilizing the HTT technique would achieve excellent patient-reported outcome scores and experience low rates of graft failure and reoperations.

Study Design

Case series; Level of evidence, 4.

Methods

Patients who underwent primary ACLR at a single institution between 2005 and 2020 were retrospectively reviewed. Patients treated with the HTT, anteromedial portal (AMP), and transtibial (TT) approaches were matched based on age, sex, and body mass index ±3 kg/m2. Demographic and surgical data as well as femoral tunnel angle measurements on anteroposterior and lateral radiographs were collected for the 3 groups. However, clinical outcomes were only reported for the HTT group because of concerns of graft heterogeneity.

Results

A total of 170 patients (median age, 26.5 years [interquartile range (IQR), 18.0-35.0 years]) who underwent ACLR using the HTT approach were included. The median coronal- and sagittal-plane femoral tunnel angles were 47° (IQR, 42°-53°) and 40° (IQR, 34°-46°), respectively. The sagittal-plane femoral tunnel angles in the HTT group were significantly more horizontal compared with those in the TT group (P < .0001), whereas the coronal-plane femoral tunnel angles in the HTT group were found to be significantly more vertical compared with those in the AMP group (P = .001) and more horizontal compared with those in the TT group (P < .0001). The graft failure and reoperation rates in the HTT group at a minimum 2-year follow-up were 1.8% (3/170) and 4.7% (8/170), respectively. The complication rate was 6.5% (11/170), with the most common complication being subjective stiffness in 7 patients. The median Lysholm score was 89.5 (IQR, 79.0-98.0); the median International Knee Documentation Committee score was 83.9 (IQR, 65.5-90.8); and the median Veterans RAND 12-Item Health Survey physical and mental component summary scores were 55.0 (IQR, 52.6-55.9) and 56.2 (IQR, 49.1-59.3), respectively.

Conclusion

ACLR using the HTT technique was associated with low graft retear and revision surgery rates and good patient-reported outcome scores at medium-term follow-up and demonstrated femoral tunnel obliquity on postoperative radiographs that correlated with optimal parameters previously reported in cadaveric and biomechanical studies.

Research progress on preparation of lateral femoral tunnel and graft fixation in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction

Anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injury is one of the most common types of sports injuries. People's need to participate in sports and desire for a high quality of life promotes the continuous development of ACL reconstruction technology. Arthroscopic ACL reconstruction has been recognized as an effective method for the treatment of ACL injuries. This review analyses and summarizes the advantages and limitations of each surgical procedure for arthroscopic ACL reconstruction reported in the relevant literature so as to promote the future development of more relevant techniques.

Analysis the Lateral Tunnel Position of the Bone Graft and Regeneration of Femur by CT Tunnel Localization

Objective: To analyze, in a retrospective study, the lateral tunnel position of the graft femur by CT after arthroscopic ACL reconstruction via the anteromedial (AM) approach and the tunnel angle shown on X-ray. Methods and Materials: 60 patients undergoing arthroscopic ACL reconstruction via AM approach with 4 femoral hamstring tendon grafts were investigated from October 2019 to October 2021. Postoperative orthogonal x-rays and computed tomography (CT) scans were obtained, and the position of the femoral tunnel obtained after CT reconstruction was correlated with the Bernard-Hertel grid. The angle of the resulting femoral tunnel on the orthogonal x-ray was analyzed against the CT tunnel position. Results: In the study, the anterior–posterior orientation was forward (P = 0.001) and the high-low orientation was similar (taken as 20%, P = 0.066) or slightly higher (taken as 21%, P = 0.025) compared to the AM beam localization in the two-beam reconstruction. Overall, the femoral tunnel angle on non-weight-bearing orthogonal x-ray was negatively correlated with the anterior–posterior (AP) position of the femoral tunnel centre as shown on CT (P = 0.004, r =−0.368) and positively, but weakly, correlated with the high-low (HL) position (P = 0.049, r = 0.254). Conclusion: Non-weight-bearing orthogonal X-rays only can make approximate predictions about the distribution of anatomical reconstruction, I.D.E.A.L reconstruction.

Effects of modified trans-tibial versus trans-portal technique on stress patterns around the femoral tunnel in anatomical single-bundle ACL reconstruction with different knee flexion angles using finite element analysis

Background

It is unclear whether different anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) graft trajectories in the distal femur would have different effects on stress generated within the distal femur around the femoral tunnel during knee motion. Thus, the purpose of this study was to determine differences in stress patterns around the femoral tunnel created by trans-portal (TP) vs. modified trans-tibial (TT) technique in anatomical ACL reconstruction at different knee flexion angles.

Methods

Twelve male subjects’ right knees were scanned with a high-resolution computed tomography (CT) scanner (slice thickness: 1 mm) at four different knee flexion angles (0°, 45°, 90°, and 135°). Three-dimensional (3D) models of these four different flexion angles were created and manipulated with several modelling programs. For the TP group, the virtual femoral tunnelling procedure was performed in a 135° flexion model from the low far anteromedial (AM) portal. For the modified TT group, the same knee models were drilled through the modified TT technique at 90° of flexion separately. Virtual grafts under tension of 40 N were put into corresponding bone tunnel and fixed at the outer aperture of femoral tunnels to simulate the suspensory fixation, followed by fixation of the grafts at the middle of tibial tunnels in the 0° knee flexion models. Finally, the models were exported to a finite element analysis package and analysed using ABAQUS/Explicit code (ABAQUS, USA) to monitor the stress occurring at the node where stress distribution occurred most significantly in the femoral bone around the bone tunnel.

Results

In general, both groups showed a high stress distribution in bony structures around inner and outer orifices of the femoral tunnel. Mean maximal stresses occurring at the lateral femoral condyle around the inner orifice of the femoral tunnel in the TP group were found to be significantly greater than those in the modified TT group at all flexion angles except 90° of flexion. Mean maximal stresses monitored around the outer orifice of the femoral tunnel in the TP group were also significantly greater than those in the modified TT group at all flexion angles.

Conclusions

Different tunnelling technologies could yield different stress patterns in the lateral femoral condyle around the femoral tunnel. During knee motion, higher stresses were noticed in the TP group than in the modified TT group, especially around inner and outer orifices of the tunnel. Position of the tunnel after reconstruction with the TP technique can have a greater effect on the stress increase in the femur compared to that with the modified TT technique.

Posteriorly positioned femoral grafts decrease long-term failure in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction, femoral and tibial graft positions did not affect long-term reported outcome

PURPOSE

To investigate the effect that femoral and tibial tunnel positions have on long-term reported and clinical outcome and to identify a safe zone based on favourable outcome.

METHODS

Seventy-eight patients from a previous randomised controlled trial were included and were followed with a mean follow-up of 11.4 years. All patients had primary trans-tibial anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction performed. The femoral and tibial tunnel positions were visualised and translated in percentages with three-dimensional computed tomography post-operatively. There were 3 separate outcome variables: patient-reported outcome measured with the IKDC Subjective Knee Form, overall failure, and radiographic osteoarthritis. The correlation between tunnel aperture positions and outcome was determined with multivariate regression. The area with best outcome was defined as the safe zone and was determined with Youden's index in conjunction with receiver operating characteristics.

RESULTS

No significant relationship was found between tunnel aperture positions and IKDC Subjective Knee Form at 10-year follow-up. The posterior-to-anterior femoral tunnel aperture position parallel to Blumensaat line showed a significant relationship (p = 0.03) to overall failure at 10-year follow-up. The mean posterior-to-anterior tunnel position of the group that did not fail was 37.7% compared to 44.1% in the overall failure group. Femoral tunnel apertures placed further anteriorly had more overall failures at long-term. The cut-off point lies at 35.0% from posterior-to-anterior parallel to Blumensaat. Of the 16 overall failures, 15 (93.8%) were placed further anteriorly than the cut-off point. No significant relationship was found between tunnel aperture positions and radiographic osteoarthritis.

CONCLUSION

Femoral and tibial tunnel positions were not associated with long-term patient-reported outcome and radiographic osteoarthritis. Long-term overall failure was more frequently seen in patients with a more anteriorly placed femoral tunnel. This study identified a safe zone located at the most posterior 35% of the femoral condyle parallel to Blumensaat. This knowledge offers guidance to surgeons to operate more precisely and accurately and reconstruct a long-lasting graft.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III.

Clinical and Radiological Outcomes of Anteromedial Portal Versus Transtibial Technique in ACL Reconstruction: A Systematic Review

Background:

The drilling technique used to make a femoral tunnel is critically important for determining outcomes after anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction. The 2 most common methods are the transtibial (TT) and anteromedial (AM) techniques.

Purpose:

To determine whether graft orientation and placement affect clinical outcomes by comparing clinical and radiological outcomes after single-bundle ACL reconstruction with the AM versus TT technique.

Study Design:

Systematic review; Level of evidence, 3.

Methods:

Articles in PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, ISI Web of Science, Scopus, and MEDLINE were searched from inception until April 25, 2020, using the following Boolean operators: transtibial OR trans-tibial AND (anteromedial OR trans-portal OR independent OR three portal OR accessory portal) AND anterior cruciate ligament.

Results:

Of 1270 studies retrieved, 39 studies involving 11,207 patients were included. Of these studies, 14 were clinical, 13 were radiological, and 12 were mixed. Results suggested that compared with the TT technique, the AM technique led to significantly improved anteroposterior and rotational knee stability, International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) scores, and recovery time from surgery. A higher proportion of negative Lachman (P = .0005) and pivot-shift test (P = .0001) results, lower KT-1000 arthrometer maximum manual displacement (P = .00001), higher Lysholm score (P = .001), a higher incidence of IKDC grade A/B (P = .05), and better visual analog scale score for satisfaction (P = .00001) were observed with the AM technique compared with the TT technique. The AM drilling technique demonstrated a significantly shorter tunnel length (P = .00001). Significant differences were seen between the femoral and tibial graft angles in both techniques. Low overall complication and revision rates were observed for ACL reconstruction with the AM drilling technique, similar to the TT drilling technique.

Conclusion:

In single-bundle ACL reconstruction, the AM drilling technique was superior to the TT drilling technique based on physical examination, scoring systems, and radiographic results. The AM portal technique provided a more reproducible anatomic graft placement compared with the TT technique.