COMPLICATIONS OF THE SCREW/WASHER TIBIAL FIXATION TECHNIQUE FOR KNEE LIGAMENT RECONSTRUCTION

Outcomes of RigidFix Cross Pin Fixation in Femoral and Tibial Tunnel for Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction

OBJECTIVES

There is no clear consensus so far on which fixation method is most favorable for the tibial tunnel in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR). The purpose of this paper is to investigate the outcome of RigidFix cross pins fixation in the tibial tunnel and to explore the advantages of RigidFix applied both in the femoral and tibial tunnel with hamstring tendon graft in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction.

METHODS

This retrospective study included 53 patients (male/female, 45/8) who underwent anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction using autologous hamstring tendons between January 2013 and December 2017 at our institute. The participants in group A (n = 36) received anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction with RigidFix cross pins fixation in both femoral and tibial tunnels, while those in group B (n = 17) with RigidFix cross pins fixation in the femoral tunnel and Interference screw fixation in the tibial tunnel. The visual analogue scale (VAS) score, International Knee Documentation Committee subjective knee form 2000 (IKDC2000) score, Lysholm knee scoring scale, Tegner activity score and the side-to-side difference were compared at 2 and 5 years postoperatively. The graft diameter, number of strands in graft and the average diameter of each strand were also compared between the two groups. The categorical parameters were analyzed by chi-square test and the continuous variables conforming to a normal distribution were analyzed by Student's t-test.

RESULTS

At 2 years postoperation, the VAS score (1.61 ± 0.55), side-to-side difference (1.50 ± 0.58) in group A were significantly lower than that in group B, and the IKDC2000 score (88.81 ± 3.88), Tegner activity score (6.14 ± 0.60) in group A were significantly higher than that in group B. At 5 years postoperation, the VAS score (1.64 ± 0.68), side-to-side difference (1.73 ± 0.63) in group A were significantly lower than that in group B, and the IKDC2000 score (89.09 ± 3.85), Tegner activity score (6.58 ± 0.94) in group A were slso significantly higher than that in group B. There was statistical difference in the change of the side-to-side difference between the two groups (group A vs. B, 0.22 ± 0.08 vs. 0.34 ± 0.11, p < 0.001). There were also statistical differences in the graft diameter (group A vs. B, 7.83 ± 0.74 vs. 7.41 ± 0.51, p = 0,038), number of strands in graft (5.67 ± 0.72 vs. 4.00 ± 0.00, p < 0.001) and the average diameter of each strand (1.41 ± 0.22 vs. 1.85 ± 0.13, p < 0.001) between the two groups.

CONCLUSION

RigidFix cross pins fixation in the tibial tunnel for anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction can achieve better 5-year results when compared with the interference screw, and the hamstring tendon can be folded into a thicker graft when RigidFix cross pins were applied in both femoral and tibial tunnels.

Risk of reoperation after primary anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction in children and adolescents

OBJECTIVE

To examine the incidence and risk factors of any-cause reoperation after primary ACLR in children and adolescents.

DESIGN

Retrospective Cohort.

SETTING

Electronic medical records from a large tertiary care, single institution integrated healthcare delivery system.

PATIENTS

Patients were under the age of 18 years and had anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. They were excluded if they had a multi-ligamentous knee injury or <1 year follow-up.

INTERVENTIONS

Patients were further identified to have undergone a subsequent knee operation ipsilaterally or contralateral ACLR.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The rate of any-cause reoperation was our primary outcome measure.

RESULTS

The median age was 16. There were 208 females (53.9%) and 178 males (46.1%) included. The median follow-up was 25 months with a minimum of 12 months (interquartile range: 16.0, 46.0). The rate of any-cause reoperation was 34.7%. There was no statistically significant difference between those who underwent reoperation versus those who did not undergo reoperation relative to age, sex, BMI, graft type, or the presence of concomitant meniscal injury. The rates of ipsilateral ACLR and contralateral ACLR at any time during the study period was 8.0% and 10.9% respectively. There was no statistically significant difference for rate of reoperation between graft types, between various concomitant injuries, between those who underwent meniscus repair or no repair.

CONCLUSIONS

This study reflects a 34.7% rate of a subsequent knee operation after ACLR in patients younger than 18 years. These findings can be used to inform pediatric patients undergoing primary ACLR on their risk of returning to the operating room.