1
|
Teng Y, Jia G, Lu F, Da L, Teng F, Zhao L, Geng B, Yun X, Han H, Xia Y. Biomechanical comparison of proximal, distal, and anatomic tibial tunnel for transtibial posterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Proc Inst Mech Eng H 2023; 237:104-112. [PMID: 36426874 DOI: 10.1177/09544119221135935] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/27/2022]
Abstract
No consensus has been reached on the optimal position of PCL tibial tunnel. The purpose of this study was to compare the biomechanical properties of proximal, distal and anatomic tibial tunnel in transtibial posterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. An in-vitro model of transtibial posterior cruciate ligament reconstruction was simulated using porcine tibias and bovine extensor tendons. Two models of biomechanical testing, load-to-failure loading, and cyclic loading, were performed in this study. The load-to-failure loading found that distal tibial tunnel resulted in greater ultimate load and yield load than the anatomic and proximal tunnel group (p < 0.05), whereas there were no significant differences in mean tensile stiffness among three groups (p > 0.05). The cyclic loading found no differences in the graft displacement at 250, 500, and 1000 cycles among three groups (p > 0.05). It was found that distal tibial tunnel showed superior ultimate load and yield load in load-to-failure loading testing compared with proximal and anatomic tibial tunnels, whereas no significant difference was found in terms of the mean displacement of the survived grafts in cyclic loading testing among three groups.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Yuanjun Teng
- Department of Orthopaedics, Lanzhou University Second Hospital, Lanzhou, Gansu, People's Republic of China.,Orthopaedics Key Laboratory of Gansu Province, Lanzhou University Second Hospital, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou, Gansu, People's Republic of China
| | - Gengxin Jia
- Department of Orthopaedics, Lanzhou University Second Hospital, Lanzhou, Gansu, People's Republic of China.,Orthopaedics Key Laboratory of Gansu Province, Lanzhou University Second Hospital, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou, Gansu, People's Republic of China
| | - Fan Lu
- Department of Orthopaedics, Lanzhou University Second Hospital, Lanzhou, Gansu, People's Republic of China.,Orthopaedics Key Laboratory of Gansu Province, Lanzhou University Second Hospital, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou, Gansu, People's Republic of China
| | - Lijun Da
- Department of Oncology, Lanzhou University Second Hospital, Lanzhou, Gansu, People's Republic of China
| | - Fei Teng
- Department of Orthopaedics, Lanzhou University Second Hospital, Lanzhou, Gansu, People's Republic of China.,Orthopaedics Key Laboratory of Gansu Province, Lanzhou University Second Hospital, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou, Gansu, People's Republic of China
| | - Lianggong Zhao
- Department of Orthopaedics, Lanzhou University Second Hospital, Lanzhou, Gansu, People's Republic of China.,Orthopaedics Key Laboratory of Gansu Province, Lanzhou University Second Hospital, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou, Gansu, People's Republic of China
| | - Bin Geng
- Department of Orthopaedics, Lanzhou University Second Hospital, Lanzhou, Gansu, People's Republic of China.,Orthopaedics Key Laboratory of Gansu Province, Lanzhou University Second Hospital, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou, Gansu, People's Republic of China
| | - Xiangdong Yun
- Department of Orthopaedics, Lanzhou University Second Hospital, Lanzhou, Gansu, People's Republic of China.,Orthopaedics Key Laboratory of Gansu Province, Lanzhou University Second Hospital, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou, Gansu, People's Republic of China
| | - Hua Han
- Department of Orthopaedics, Lanzhou University Second Hospital, Lanzhou, Gansu, People's Republic of China.,Orthopaedics Key Laboratory of Gansu Province, Lanzhou University Second Hospital, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou, Gansu, People's Republic of China
| | - Yayi Xia
- Department of Orthopaedics, Lanzhou University Second Hospital, Lanzhou, Gansu, People's Republic of China.,Orthopaedics Key Laboratory of Gansu Province, Lanzhou University Second Hospital, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou, Gansu, People's Republic of China
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
D'Ambrosi R, Hallé A, Hardy A. Good clinical and radiological results following remnant-preserving posterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a systematic review. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 2022; 31:2418-2432. [PMID: 36208342 PMCID: PMC10183434 DOI: 10.1007/s00167-022-07192-z] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/25/2022] [Accepted: 09/30/2022] [Indexed: 11/06/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE The objective of this systematic literature review was to report the results and complications of recent remnant preservation techniques in posterior cruciate ligament (PCL) reconstruction. METHODS A systematic review was conducted based on the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Two independent reviewers searched the PubMed, Scopus, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases using the terms "posterior cruciate ligament" or "PCL" and "remnant preserving." The outcome measures extracted from the studies were the Lysholm score, the International Knee Documentation Committee's (IKDC) subjective and objective scores, Tegner scores, Orthopädische Arbeitsgruppe Knie (OAK) rate of return to sports, and rate of complications. Data were also extracted from studies that used stress radiographs to perform a quantitative assessment of the preoperative and postoperative anteroposterior stability. RESULTS The systematic review included 13 studies. The patient cohort of consisted of 643 participants (544 [84.6%] men and 99 [15.4%] women) with a mean age of 32.9 ± 4.0 years. The mean postoperative follow-up was 34.5 ± 10.9 months (range: 24-96 months), while the mean time from injury to surgery was 14.4 ± 9.9 months (range: 0-240 months). All studies reported clinically significant improvement at final follow-up, as evident from the measured subjective and objective IKDC scores, Lysholm score, Tegner score, and OAK rate. Only three studies reported return to sports activity, with a mean percentage of 90.8% (99/109). All studies showed a significant improvement in posterior translation, from 11.5 ± 1.2 mm to 3.3 ± 1.1 mm, using radiography (side-to-side difference). This systematic review revealed 13 (2.0%) failures and 33 (5.1%) minor complications: 10 (1.6%) cases of stiffness, 21 (4.9%) screws removal, 1 (0.2%) injury of the peroneal nerve, and 1 (0.2%) fibular fracture. CONCLUSIONS With the currently available data, all studies included in the review on posterior cruciate ligament reconstruction with remnant preservation demonstrated satisfactory outcomes at mid-term follow-up (> 24 months), despite varying surgical techniques and graft types, and intervals from injury to surgery. For clinical relevance, standard PCL reconstruction is a highly effective operation in terms of improvement in functional status, knee stability, quality of life, and cost effectiveness. The remnant preservation technique requires more comprehensive diagnostic assessments of the PCL remnant patterns and more complicated surgical procedures. Given the absence so far of high quality studies with long-term follow-up, the remnant-preserving techniques should be recommended only by experienced knee arthroscopic surgeons. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE Level IV. STUDY REGISTRATION reviewregistry1376- www.researchregistry.com .
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Riccardo D'Ambrosi
- IRCCS Istituto Ortopedico Galeazzi, Milan, Italy.
- Dipartimento di Scienze Biomediche per la Salute, Università degli Studi di Milano, Milan, Italy.
| | - Aurélien Hallé
- Service de Chirurgie Orthopedique et Traumatologique, CHU de Cochin, Paris, France
| | | |
Collapse
|
3
|
Feng K, Wang T, Tang J, Hao X, Ma X, Qu Z, Wang W. Application of CT-MRI Fusion-Based Three-Dimensional Reconstruction Technique in the Anatomic Study of Posterior Cruciate Ligament. Orthop Surg 2022; 14:2845-2853. [PMID: 36120826 PMCID: PMC9627086 DOI: 10.1111/os.13477] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/06/2022] [Revised: 08/01/2022] [Accepted: 08/05/2022] [Indexed: 11/28/2022] Open
Abstract
Objective During PCL reconstruction surgery, precise and personalized positioning of the graft tunnel is very important. In order to obtain patient‐specific anatomical data, we established a three‐dimensional knee joint fusion model to provide a unified imaging strategy, as well as anatomical information, for individualized and accurate posterior cruciate ligament (PCL) reconstruction. Methods This is an exploration study. From January 2019 to January 2020, 20 healthy adults randomly were enrolled and assessed via CT and MRI imaging. A three‐dimensional fusion model of the knee joint was generated using the modified MIMIMICS and image fusion software. On the fused image, the areas of the femoral and tibial PCL footprint of both knees were measured. The anatomical center of the PCL footprint was measured at the femoral and tibial ends. The relevant bony landmarks surrounding the PCL femoral and tibial attachment were also measured. Paired t‐tests were employed for all statistical analyzes, and p < 0.05 was considered as statistically significant. Results All 20 subjects achieved successful image fusion modeling and measurement, with an average duration of 12 h. The lengths of the LF1‐LF3 were 32.1 ± 1.8, 6.8 ± 2.5, and 23.3 ± 2.1 mm, respectively. The lengths of the LT1‐LT3 were 37.3 ± 3.3, 45.6 ± 5.3, and 6.0 ± 1.2 mm, respectively. The distances between the tibial PCL center of the left knee to the medial groove, champagne‐glass drop‐off, and the apex of the medial intercondylar were 8.4 ± 2.4, 9.2 ± 1.8, and 15.3 ± 1.4 mm, respectively, and the corresponding distances from the right knee were 8.0 ± 2.0, 9.4 ± 2.2, and 16.1 ± 1.8 mm, respectively. We observed no difference between the bilateral sides, in terms of the distance from the PCL center to the PCL attachment‐related landmark, under arthroscopic guidance. The area of the femoral and tibial PCL footprints on the left knee were 115.3 ± 33.5 and 146.6 ± 24.4 mm2, respectively, and the corresponding areas on the right knee were 121.8 ± 35.6 and 142.8 ± 19.5 mm2, respectively. There was no difference between the bilateral sides in terms of the PCL footprint areas. Conclusion In the fusion image, the PCL attachment center and relevant bony landmarks which can be easily identified under arthroscopy can be accurately measured. The model can also obtain personalized anatomical data of the PCL on the unaffected side of the patient, which can guide clinical PCL reconstruction.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Keyi Feng
- Department of Bone and Joint Surgery, Chongqing University Three Gorges Hospital, Chongqing, China
| | - Tianyue Wang
- Department of Maxillofacial Surgery, Chongqing University Three Gorges Hospital, Chongqing, China
| | - Jin Tang
- Department of Bone and Joint Surgery, Chongqing University Three Gorges Hospital, Chongqing, China
| | - Xiaorui Hao
- Department of Orthopaedics, Nanping First Hospital affiliated to Fujian Medical University, Nanping, China
| | - Xiaojun Ma
- Department of Sports Medicine, Affiliated Zhongshan Hospital of Dalian University, Dalian, China
| | - Zhenan Qu
- Department of Sports Medicine, Affiliated Zhongshan Hospital of Dalian University, Dalian, China
| | - Weiming Wang
- Deportment of Sports Medicine, Affiliated Xinhua Hospital of Dalian University, Dalian, China
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Zhao J. Single-Bundle Anatomical Posterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction With Remnant Preservation. Arthrosc Tech 2021; 10:e2303-e2310. [PMID: 34754738 PMCID: PMC8556646 DOI: 10.1016/j.eats.2021.07.006] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/12/2021] [Accepted: 07/01/2021] [Indexed: 02/03/2023] Open
Abstract
Remnant always exists following injuries of the posterior cruciate ligament (PCL). To improve the clinical outcomes of PCL reconstruction, preservation of the remnant has long been a consideration. However, how to make the remnant-preservation technique simple and more effective is of concern. We describe a single-bundle anatomical PCL reconstruction technique with remnant preservation in which the posteromedial and posterolateral portals are used, the graft is placed at the lateral side of the remnant, and pulleys are used to facilitate graft passage at the 2 killer turns of the grafting routes. We consider introduction of this technique will provide reasonable choices in PCL reconstruction.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jinzhong Zhao
- Address correspondence to Jinzhong Zhao, M.D., Department of Sports Medicine, Shanghai Sixth People’s Hospital, Shanghai Jiao Tong University, 600 Yishan Rd., Shanghai 200233, China.
| |
Collapse
|