Can Surgeons Identify ACL Femoral Ridges Landmark and Optimal Tunnel Position? A 3D Model Study

Distribution of bone tunnel positions and treatment efficacy of bone landmark positioning method for anatomical reconstruction of the anterior cruciate ligament: a case control study

BACKGROUND

This study aimed to investigate the distribution of femoral tunnel and explore the influences of bone tunnel positions on knee functions. The bone landmark positioning method was used to position the femoral tunnel during the anatomical reconstruction surgery in patients with anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) rupture.

METHODS

Data of patients who underwent anatomical reconstruction of the ACL between January 2015 and July 2018, were retrospectively analyzed. The distribution of the femoral tunnel was recorded on 3-D CT after surgery. The tunnel positions were classified into good and poor position groups based on whether the position was in the normal range (24-37% on the x-axis and 28-43% on the y-axis). The Lysholm and IKDC scores, KT-1000 side-to-side difference, pivot shift test and Lachman test results of the knee joints were recorded, and then the differences in knee joint functions between the two groups were analyzed.

RESULTS

84 eligible patients (84 knees) were finally included in this study. Twenty-two and 62 of the patients were categorized in the good and poor position groups, respectively, and the rate of good position was 26.2%. The distribution of bone tunnel was as follows: (x-axis) deep position in 10 patients (12%), normal position in 58 patients (69%), and shallow position in 16 patients (19%); (y-axis) high position in 54 patients (64%), normal position in 26 patients (31%), and low position in 4 patients (5%). 1 year later, the Lysholm and IKDC scores were significantly better in the good position group (P < 0.05), the KT-1000 side to side difference, the pivot shift test and Lachman test results were better in the good position group (P < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

The bone tunnels were found to be distributed in and beyond the normal range using the bone landmark method to position the femoral tunnel in the single-bundle anatomical reconstruction of ACL, while the rate of good bone tunnel position was low. The knee joint function scores and stability were lower in patients with poor position of the femoral tunnel.

Trends in Primary Anatomical Single-Bundle Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction Practice in Adult Patients Prevalent Among Arthroscopy Surgeons of Six Southern States of India

BACKGROUND

Although guidelines from multiple scientific studies decide the general trend in ACLR practice, there is often a variation between scientific guidelines and actual practice.

METHODS

A 17-member committee comprised of sports surgeons with experience of a minimum of 10 years of arthroscopy surgery finalized a survey questionnaire consisting of concepts in ACL tear management and perioperative trends, intraoperative and post-operative practices regarding single-bundle anatomic ACLR. The survey questionnaire was mailed to 584 registered sports surgeons in six states of south India. A single, non-modifiable response was collected from each member and analyzed.

RESULTS

324 responses were received out of 584 members. A strong consensus was present regarding Hamstring tendons preference for ACLR, graft diameter ≥ 7.5 mm, viewing femoral footprint through the anterolateral portal, drilling femoral tunnel from anteromedial portal guided by ridges and remnants of femoral footprint using a freehand technique, suspensory devices to fix the graft in femur and interference screw in the tibia and post-operative bracing. A broad consensus was achieved in using a brace to minimize symptoms of instability of an ACL tear and antibiotic soaking of graft. There was no consensus regarding the timing of ACLR, preferred graft in athletes, pre-tensioning, extra-articular procedure, and return to sports. There was disagreement over hybrid tibial fixation and suture tapes to augment graft.

CONCLUSION

Diverse practices continue to prevail in the management of ACL injuries. However, some of the consensuses reached in this survey match global practices. Contrasting or inconclusive practices should be explored for potential future research.