Computer-assisted surgery is not more accurate or precise than conventional arthroscopic ACL reconstruction: a prospective randomized clinical trial

Usefulness of 3-Dimensional Computed Tomography Assessment of Femoral Tunnel after Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction

Positioning of the femoral tunnel during anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction is the most crucial factor for successful procedure. Owing to the inter-individual variability in the intra-articular anatomy, it can be challenging to obtain precise tunnel placement and ensure consistent results. Currently, the three-dimensional (3D) reconstruction of computed tomography (CT) scans is considered the best method for determining whether femoral tunnels are positioned correctly. Postoperative 3D-CT feedback can improve the accuracy of femoral tunnel placement. Precise tunnel formation obtained through feedback has a positive effect on graft maturation, graft failure, and clinical outcomes after surgery. However, even if femoral tunnel placement on 3D CT is appropriate, we should recognize that acute graft bending negatively affects surgical results. This review aimed to discuss the implementation of 3D-CT evaluation for predicting postoperative outcomes following ACL re-construction. Reviewing research that has performed 3D CT evaluations after ACL reconstruction can provide clinically significant evidence of the formation of ideal tunnels following anatomic ACL reconstruction.

Computer-assisted navigation in ACL reconstruction improves anatomic tunnel placement with similar clinical outcomes

BACKGROUND

While the use of navigation systems in anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction theoretically improves tunnel placement accuracy and clinical outcomes, the existing literature remains inconclusive. We aimed to evaluate the potential benefits of navigated ACL reconstruction on tunnel placement and clinical outcomes.

METHODS

In this retrospective study, we evaluated a cohort of patients who underwent conventional or navigated (OrthoPilot system) primary ACL reconstruction at our institution from June 2004 to October 2009. Anteroposterior and lateral radiographic knee assessments were evaluated to assess postoperative tunnel positioning. Clinical outcomes, including the International Knee Documentation Committee classification, Lysholm score, and Tegner score, were evaluated preoperatively and 1-year postoperatively. Radiographic and clinical outcomes were compared and analysed using independent 2-sample t-tests and Chi-square tests.

RESULTS

Sixty patients met the inclusion criteria and were included for analysis, comprising of 26 navigated and 34 conventional reconstructions. Postoperative radiographs showed no differences in tibial tunnel position between both groups, but a significantly smaller deviation from the recommended position in the navigated group (navigated: 5.96 %; conventional: 7.92 %; p = 0.008). Femoral tunnel placements in the navigated group were significantly more perpendicularly away from the Blumensaat line (navigated: 38.90 %; conventional: 31.94 %; p = 0.001), with a greater deviation from recommended position (navigated: 11.00 %; conventional: 6.94 %; p = 0.009). There were no differences in 1-year postoperative clinical outcomes (p > 0.05).

CONCLUSION

Navigated ACL reconstruction resulted in a more anatomic femoral tunnel placement and similar clinical outcomes as conventional reconstruction. Further research should be conducted to clarify the potential biomechanical and clinical impacts of navigated ACL reconstruction.

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.

Current and future of anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction techniques

In recent years, anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction has generally yielded favorable outcomes. However, ACL reconstruction has not provided satisfactory results in terms of the rate of returning to sports and prevention of osteoarthritis (OA) progression. In this paper, we outline current techniques for ACL reconstruction such as graft materials, double-bundle or single-bundle reconstruction, femoral tunnel drilling, all-inside technique, graft fixation, preservation of remnant, anterolateral ligament reconstruction, ACL repair, revision surgery, treatment for ACL injury with OA and problems, and discuss expected future trends. To enable many more orthopedic surgeons to achieve excellent ACL reconstruction outcomes with less invasive surgery, further studies aimed at improving surgical techniques are warranted. Further development of biological augmentation and robotic surgery technologies for ACL reconstruction is also required.

Differences in Knee Shape between ACL Injured and Non-Injured: A Matched Case-Control Study of 168 Patients

OBJECTIVE

Anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injury prevention programs could be more effective if we could select patients at risk for sustaining an ACL rupture. The purpose of this study is to identify radiographic shape variants of the knee between patients with and patients without an ACL rupture.

METHODS

We compared the lateral and Rosenberg view X-rays of 168 prospectively followed patients with a ruptured ACL to a control group with intact ACLs, matched for gender, after knee trauma. We used statistical shape modeling software to examine knee shape and find differences in shape variants between both groups.

RESULTS

In the Rosenberg view X-rays, we found five shape variants to be significantly different between patients with an ACL rupture and patients with an intact ACL but with knee trauma. Overall, patients who had ruptured their ACL had smaller, flatter intercondylar notches, a lower lateral tibia plateau, a lower medial spike of the eminence, and a smaller tibial eminence compared to control patients.

CONCLUSION

Patients with an ACL rupture have smaller intercondylar notches and smaller tibial eminences in comparison to patients with an intact ACL after knee trauma.

An Assessment of Randomized Controlled Trial Quality in The Journal of Bone & Joint Surgery: Update from 2001 to 2013

BACKGROUND

The quality of reporting of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published in The Journal of Bone & Joint Surgery (JBJS) from 1988 to 2000 was previously analyzed. The purpose of this current study was to analyze the quality of reporting of RCTs published in JBJS from 2001 to 2013 to identify trends over time and potential areas of improvement for future clinical trials.

METHODS

A manual search of the JBJS database identified RCTs published between January 2001 and December 2013. Quality assessments, using the Detsky quality-of-reporting index (Detsky score), a modified Cochrane risk-of-bias tool, and abstraction of relevant data identifying predictors of quality, were conducted.

RESULTS

A total of 5,780 publications were identified in JBJS from 2001 to 2013, with 285 RCTs (4.9%), representing an increase from the prior 13-year period. The overall mean transformed Detsky score (and standard error) increased significantly (p < 0.001) from 68.1% ± 1.67% to 76.24% ± 0.72%. The percentage of multicenter RCTs decreased from 67% to 31%. The percentage of positive trials also decreased from 80% to 50.5%, as did the mean sample size (212 to 166). Regression analysis indicated that trials with an epidemiologist as the first author and nonsurgical trials were significantly associated (p = 0.001) with a higher overall trial quality score. The categories of the lowest mean methodology scores were randomization and concealment, eligibility criteria, and reasons for patient exclusion, as identified with the Detsky score, and patient and assessor blinding, as identified with the risk-of-bias assessment.

CONCLUSIONS

The quantity and quality of published RCTs in JBJS have increased in the 2001 to 2013 time period compared with the previous time period. Although these improvements are encouraging, trends to smaller, single-center trials were also observed. To efficiently determine the efficacy of orthopaedic treatments and limit bias, high-quality randomized trials of appropriate sample size and rigorous design are needed.

Japanese Orthopaedic Association (JOA) clinical practice guidelines on the management of anterior cruciate ligament injury - Secondary publication

BACKGROUND

This clinical guideline presents recommendations for the management of patients with anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injury, endorsed by the Japanese Orthopaedic Association (JOA) and Japanese Orthopaedic Society of Knee, Arthroscopy and Sports Medicine (JOSKAS).

METHODS

The JOA ACL guideline committee revised the previous guideline based on "Medical Information Network Distribution Service Handbook for Clinical Practice Guideline Development 2014", which proposed a desirable method for preparing clinical guidelines in Japan. Furthermore, the importance of "the balance of benefit and harm" was also emphasized. This guideline consists of 21 clinical questions (CQ) and 23 background questions (BQ). For each CQ, outcomes from the literature were collected and evaluated systematically according to the adopted study design.

RESULTS

We evaluated the objectives and results of each study in order to make a decision on the level of evidence so as to integrate the results with our recommendations for each CQ. For BQ, the guideline committee proposed recommendations based on the literature.

CONCLUSIONS

This guideline is intended to be used by physicians, orthopedic surgeons, physical therapists, and athletic trainers managing ACL injuries. We hope that this guideline is useful for appropriate decision-making and improved management of ACL injuries.

Radiological evaluation of tunnel position in single bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction in the Indian population and their clinical correlation

BACKGROUND

Proper positioning of osseous tunnels during single bundle arthroscopic ACL reconstruction, which gives reproducibly good clinical outcome, is a matter of concern. Little evidence is there correlating tunnel position in arthroscopic ACL reconstruction with their clinical outcome in Indian population. Our aim in this study was to examine if the radiological tunnel-positions were significantly associated to the clinical outcomes.

METHODS

ACL reconstruction was performed in 147 young patients with an isolated ACL tear. They were followed up prospectively for the next two years. Clinical assessment of each patient was done using the International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) evaluation form before surgery and at two years later the surgery. At the same time, the radiological assessment was done on standard digital radiographs.

RESULTS

Considering the anterior and posterior-most points on the Blumensaat's line as 0% and 100% respectively the average position of the femoral tunnel was at 84.8%. Similarly, the tibial tunnel was at 46.8% along the tibial plateau. On the coronal plane the average position of the tibial tunnel was at 45.6% point along the tibial plateau (measured from the medial-most point towards laterally). The mean position of the femoral tunnel in the coronal plane was at 43.2% along the broadest part of the distal femur (measured from the lateral extent). The average inclination angle of the graft measured 19.6° (along the coronal plane).

CONCLUSION

Ideal clinical outcome was significantly associated with the placement of the femoral tunnel along the sagittal plane. Placement of the femoral tunnel should not be beyond the 85% mark along the Blumensaat's line from the anterior-most point. No correlation was established between clinical results and any of the remaining radiological parameters described above.

To Improve Your Surgical Drilling Skills, Make Use of Your Index Fingers

BACKGROUND

Surgery has greatly benefited from various technologic advancements over the past decades. Surgery remains, however, mostly manual labor performed by well-trained surgeons. Little research has focused on improving osseous drilling techniques. The objective of this study was to compare the accuracy and precision of different orthopaedic drilling techniques involving the use of both index fingers.

QUESTIONS/PURPOSES

(1) Does the shooting grip technique and aiming at the contralateral index finger improve accuracy and precision in drilling? (2) Is the effect of drilling technique on accuracy and precision affected by the experience level of the performer?

METHODS

This study included 36 participants from two Dutch training hospitals who were subdivided into three groups (N = 12 per group) based on their surgical experience (that is, no experience, residents, and surgeons). The participants had no further experience with drilling outside the hospital nor were there other potential confounding variables that could influence the test outcomes. Participants were instructed to drill toward a target exit point on a synthetic bone model. There were four conditions: (1) clenched grip without aiming; (2) shooting grip without aiming; (3) clenched grip with aiming at the contralateral index finger; and (4) shooting grip aiming at the contralateral index finger. Participants were only used to a clenched grip without aiming in clinical practice. Each participant had to drill five times per technique per test, and the test was repeated after 4 weeks. Accuracy was defined as the systematic error of all measurements and was calculated as the mean of the five distances between the five exit points and the target exit point, whereas precision was defined as the random error of all measurements and calculated as the SD of those five distances. Accuracy and precision were analyzed using mixed-design analyses of variance.

RESULTS

Accuracy was highest when using a clenched grip with aiming at the index finger (mean 4.0 mm, SD 1.1) compared with a clenched grip without aiming (mean 5.0 mm, SD 1.2, p = 0.004) and a shooting grip without aiming (mean 4.9 mm, SD 1.4, p = 0.015). The shooting grip with aiming at the index finger (mean 4.1 mm, SD 1.2) was also more accurate than a clenched grip without aiming (p = 0.006) and a shooting grip without aiming (p = 0.014). Shooting grip with aiming at the opposite index finger (median 2.0 mm, interquartile range [IQR] 1.2) showed the best precision and outperformed a clenched grip without aiming (median 2.9 mm, IQR 1.1, p = 0.016), but was not different than the shooting grip without aiming (median 2.2 mm, IQR 1.4) or the clenched grip with aiming (median 2.4 mm, IQR 1.3). The accuracy of surgeons (mean 4.1 mm, SD 1.1) was higher than the inexperienced group (mean 5.0 mm, SD 1.1, p = 0.012). The same applied for precision (median 2.2 mm, IQR 1.0 versus median 2.8 mm, IQR 1.4, p = 0.008).

CONCLUSIONS

A shooting grip combined with aiming toward the index finger of the opposite hand had better accuracy and precision compared with a clenched grip alone. Based on this study, experience does matter, because the orthopaedic surgeons outperformed the less experienced participants. Based on our study, we advise surgeons to aim at the index finger of the opposite hand when possible and to align the ipsilateral index finger to the drill bit.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level II, therapeutic study.

Post-operative 3D CT feedback improves accuracy and precision in the learning curve of anatomic ACL femoral tunnel placement

PURPOSE

To evaluate the feedback from post-operative three-dimensional computed tomography (3D-CT) on femoral tunnel placement in the learning process, to obtain an anatomic anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction.

METHODS

A series of 60 consecutive patients undergoing primary ACL reconstruction using autologous hamstrings single-bundle outside-in technique were prospectively included in the study. ACL reconstructions were performed by the same trainee-surgeon during his learning phase of anatomic ACL femoral tunnel placement. A CT scan with dedicated tunnel study was performed in all patients within 48 h after surgery. The data obtained from the CT scan were processed into a three-dimensional surface model, and a true medial view of the lateral femoral condyle was used for the femoral tunnel placement analysis. Two independent examiners analysed the tunnel placements. The centre of femoral tunnel was measured using a quadrant method as described by Bernard and Hertel. The coordinates measured were compared with anatomic coordinates values described in the literature [deep-to-shallow distance (X-axis) 28.5%; high-to-low distance (Y-axis) 35.2%]. Tunnel placement was evaluated in terms of accuracy and precision. After each ACL reconstruction, results were shown to the surgeon to receive an instant feedback in order to achieve accurate correction and improve tunnel placement for the next surgery. Complications and arthroscopic time were also recorded.

RESULTS

Results were divided into three consecutive series (1, 2, 3) of 20 patients each. A trend to placing femoral tunnel slightly shallow in deep-to-shallow distance and slightly high in high-to-low distance was observed in the first and the second series. A progressive improvement in tunnel position was recorded from the first to second series and from the second to the third series. Both accuracy (+52.4%) and precision (+55.7%) increased from the first to the third series (p < 0.001). Arthroscopic time decreased from a mean of 105 min in the first series to 57 min in the third series (p < 0.001). After 50 ACL reconstructions, a satisfactory anatomic femoral tunnel was reached.

CONCLUSION

Feedback from post-operative 3D-CT is effective in the learning process to improve accuracy and precision of femoral tunnel placement in order to obtain anatomic ACL reconstruction and helps to reduce also arthroscopic time and learning curve. For clinical relevance, trainee-surgeons should use feedback from post-operative 3DCT to learn anatomic ACL femoral tunnel placement and apply it appropriately.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Consecutive case series, Level IV.

Three dimensionalCT analysis of femoral tunnel position after ACL reconstruction. A prospective study of one hundred and thirty five cases

BACKGROUND

One of the principal causes for failure of anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACL) is femoral tunnel mal-position. Several studies compare the position of femoral tunnels achieved with various techniques, with small series and using a quadrant assessment method.

QUESTIONS

(1) What is the incidence of anatomical positioning of the intra-articular femoral tunnel aperture in primary ACL reconstruction in a university knee surgery? (2) What are the main errors in positioning?

METHODS

3D-CT scans were performed after primary ACL reconstruction in 135 consecutive cases. The intra-articular position of the femoral tunnel aperture was analyzed using the Magnussen classification.

RESULTS

The intra-articular tunnel position was deemed anatomical in 77%, intermediate in 20.8%, and non-anatomical in 2.2%. Among the mal-positioned tunnels, 54.8% were vertical, 29% were anteriorly positioned, and 16.1% were both.

CONCLUSIONS

The intra articular femoral tunnel aperture was well positioned using an outside-in technique. The main error of tunnel positioning was a tunnel too vertical.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III, prospective study (case series).

Reconstruction of the anterior cruciate ligament: comparison of analgesia using intrathecal morphine, intra-articular morphine and intra-articular levobupivacaine

OBJECTIVE

To compare the analgesic effect of intra-articular administration of morphine and levobupivacaine (separately or in combination) with intrathecal administration of morphine in patients undergoing anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction using autologous grafts from the patellar tendon.

METHODS

This was a retrospective analysis on data gathered from the medical files of 60 patients aged 20 to 50 years who underwent knee video arthroscopy for ACL reconstruction. The patients were divided into four groups of 15 individuals (A, B, C and D) according to the agent administered into the joint and around the incision: 20 mL of saline solution with 5 mg of morphine in A; 20 mL of 0.5% levobupivacaine solution in B; 10 mL of solution with 2.5 mg of morphine plus 10 mL of 0.5% levobupivacaine solution in C; and morphine administered intrathecally in D.

RESULTS

All the groups presented low pain scores during the first 12 h after the surgery. Groups B and C presented significantly greater pain scores than shown by group D (control), 24 h after the surgery. There was no statistical difference in pain scores between group A and group D.

CONCLUSION

The patients in group A presented analgesia comparable to that of the patients in group D, whereas the procedure of group C was no capable of reproducing the analgesic effect observed in group D, as observed 24 h after the surgery. Further studies are needed in order to show the exact mechanism of action, along with the ideal dose and concentration for applying opioids to joints.

Variability of tunnel positioning in fluoroscopic-assisted ACL reconstruction

PURPOSE

Intraoperative fluoroscopy has been proposed as a feasible method to improve the accuracy of anatomical tunnel positioning. However, it has so far not been determined, whether this technique reduces the variability of tunnel positioning in a clinical set-up. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to determine the variability of tunnel positions applying intraoperative fluoroscopy.

METHODS

Femoral and tibial tunnel positions of 112 fluoroscopic ACL reconstruction cases were determined according to validated radiological measurement methods. Mean positions, standard deviations and ranges were calculated to determine the variability of the tunnel positions. Subgroup variability analysis was performed to analyse cases in which tunnel positions were corrected.

RESULTS

Applying intraoperative fluoroscopy, the variability of tunnel positions was found to be 3 % at the femur (range 15.4 %) and 2.3 % at the tibia (9.7 %). In 34 cases (30.0 %), non-satisfactory tunnel positions were identified and could be corrected achieving more accurate positions regarding to radiological parameters (14× femur, 16× tibia, 4× femur and tibia).

CONCLUSIONS

The results of the presented study indicate that intraoperative fluoroscopy allows to identify non-accurate tunnel positions regarding to radiological criteria. The determined low variability indicates that fluoroscopic-based ACL reconstruction can be recommended as a feasible, easy and effective adjunct that enables surgeons to create more consistent and reliable tunnel positions in ACL reconstruction.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

IV.

Computer-assisted and robotic surgery in orthopedics: where we are in 2014

Successful outcomes after orthopedic surgical procedures are believed to be highly dependent on reproducible anatomic accuracy. Immediate intraoperative feedback helps surgeons to achieve this accuracy as has been demonstrated with the use of fluoroscopy. Non-image-based computer navigation has been used in joint arthroplasty, anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction, high tibial osteotomy, and cartilage procedures along with applications in hip and shoulder arthroscopy. Most short-term studies have demonstrated superior accuracy when compared with conventional techniques; however, very few studies have shown better clinical outcomes. Robotic-assisted surgery has been most popular in total and unicompartmental arthroplasty, which again has greater accuracy but similar clinical outcomes when compared with conventional techniques. Economic analyses indicate that these high-cost technologies may only be cost-effective in high-volume centers. Other studies have shown that computer navigation improves the accuracy of lower volume surgeons to a greater degree than higher volume surgeons allowing the former to have results similar to the latter.

Reliability and reproducibility of several methods of arthroscopic assessment of femoral tunnel position during anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction

PURPOSE

To assess interobserver and intraobserver agreement of estimating anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) femoral tunnel positioning arthroscopically using circular and linear (noncircular) estimation methods and to determine whether overlay template visual aids improve agreement.

METHODS

Standardized intraoperative pictures of femoral tunnel pilot holes (taken with a 30° arthroscope through an anterolateral portal at 90° of knee flexion with horizontal being parallel to the tibial surface) in 27 patients undergoing single-bundle ACL reconstruction were presented to 3 fellowship-trained arthroscopists on 2 separate occasions. On both viewings, each surgeon estimated the femoral tunnel pilot hole location to the nearest half-hour mark using a whole clock face and half clock face, to the nearest 15° using a whole compass and half compass, in the top or bottom half of a linear quadrant, and in the top or bottom half of a linear trisector. Evaluations were performed first without and then with an overlay template of each estimation method.

RESULTS

The average difference among reviewers was quite similar for all 4 circular methods with the use of visual aids. Without overlay template visual aids, pair-wise κ statistic values for interobserver agreement ranged from -0.14 to 0.56 for the whole clock face and from 0.16 to 0.42 for the half clock face. With overlay visual guides, interobserver agreement ranged from 0.29 to 0.63 for the whole clock face and from 0.17 to 0.66 for the half clock face. The quadrant method's interobserver agreement ranged from 0.22 to 0.60, and that of the trisection method ranged from 0.17 to 0.57. Neither linear estimation method's reliability uniformly improved with the use of overlay templates. Intraobserver agreement without overlay templates ranged from 0.17 to 0.49 for the whole clock face, 0.11 to 0.47 for the half clock face, 0.01 to 0.66 for the quadrant method, and 0.20 to 0.57 for the trisection method. Use of overlay templates did not uniformly improve intraobserver agreement for any estimation method.

CONCLUSIONS

There does not appear to be any advantage of using a half clock face or compass for estimating femoral tunnel position compared with a whole clock-face analogy. Visual reference aids appear to improve interobserver agreement (reliability) of circular analogies. The linear quadrant appears to be the most reliable method (fair to moderate agreement) for estimating femoral tunnel position without a visual aid for reference, but even better reliability, ranging from fair to good agreement, may be obtained by using the whole clock-face analogy with a visual aid.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Increasing femoral tunnel position reliability may improve outcomes of ACL reconstruction surgery.

Computer-assisted surgery for knee ligament reconstruction

BACKGROUND

Anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction is one of the most frequently performed orthopaedic procedures. The most common technical cause of reconstruction failure is graft malpositioning. Computer-assisted surgery (CAS) aims to improve the accuracy of graft placement. Although posterior cruciate ligament (PCL) injury and reconstruction are far less common, PCL reconstruction has comparable difficulties relating to graft placement. This is an update of a Cochrane review first published in 2011.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of computer-assisted reconstruction surgery versus conventional operating techniques for ACL or PCL injuries in adults.

SEARCH METHODS

For this update, we searched the Cochrane Bone, Joint and Muscle Trauma Group Specialised Register (from 2010 to July 2013), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (Issue 5, 2013), MEDLINE (from 2010 to July 2013), EMBASE (from 2010 to July 2013), CINAHL (from 2010 to July 2013), article references and prospective trial registers.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-randomized controlled trials that compared CAS for ACL or PCL reconstruction versus conventional operating techniques not involving CAS.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently screened search results, assessed the risk of bias in the studies and extracted data. Where appropriate, we pooled data using risk ratios (RR) or mean differences (MD), both with 95% confidence intervals (CI).

MAIN RESULTS

The updated search resulted in the inclusion of one new study. This review now includes five RCTs with 366 participants. There were more female than male participants (70% were female); their ages ranged from 14 to 53 years. All trials involved ACL reconstructions performed by experienced surgeons.Assessing the studies' risk of bias was hampered by poor reporting of trial methods, and consequently several studies were judged to be 'unclear' for several types of bias. One trial presenting primary outcome data was at high risk of detection bias from lack of clinician blinding and attrition bias from an unaccounted loss to follow-up at two years.We found moderate quality evidence (three trials, 193 participants) of no clinically relevant difference between CAS and conventional surgery in International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) subjective scores (self-reported measure of knee function; scale of 0 to 100 where 100 was best function). Pooled data from two of these trials (120 participants) showed a small, but clinically irrelevant difference favouring CAS (MD 2.05, 95% CI -2.16 to 6.25). A third trial (73 participants) also found minimal difference in IKDC subjective scores (reported MD 0.2).We found low quality evidence (two trials, 120 participants) showing no difference between the two groups in Lysholm scores, also measured on a scale 0 to 100 where 100 is best function (MD 0.25, 95% CI -3.75 to 4.25). We found very low quality evidence (one trial, 40 participants) showing no difference between the two groups in Tegner scores. We found low quality evidence (three trials, 173 participants) showing the majority of participants in both groups were assessed as having normal or nearly normal knee function (86/87 with CAS versus 84/86 with no CAS; RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.96 to 1.06).Similarly, no differences were found for our secondary outcome measures of knee stability, loss in range of motion and tunnel placement. None of the trials reported on re-operation.No adverse post-surgical events were reported in two trials (133 participants); this outcome was not reported by the other three trials.CAS use was associated with longer operating times compared with conventional operating techniques: the mean difference in operating times reported in the studies ranged between 9 and 27 minutes.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

From the available evidence, we are unable to demonstrate or refute a favourable effect of CAS for cruciate ligament reconstructions of the knee compared with conventional reconstructions. However, the currently available evidence does not indicate that CAS in knee ligament reconstruction improves outcome. There is a need for improved reporting of future studies of this technology.

Computer-assisted surgery for knee ligament reconstruction

BACKGROUND

Anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction is one of the most frequently performed orthopaedic procedures. The most common technical cause of reconstruction failure is graft malpositioning. Computer-assisted surgery (CAS) aims to improve the accuracy of graft placement. Although posterior cruciate ligament (PCL) injury and reconstruction are far less common, PCL reconstruction has comparable difficulties relating to graft placement. This is an update of a Cochrane review first published in 2011.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of computer-assisted reconstruction surgery versus conventional operating techniques for ACL or PCL injuries in adults.

SEARCH METHODS

For this update, we searched the Cochrane Bone, Joint and Muscle Trauma Group Specialised Register (from 2010 to July 2013), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (Issue 5, 2013), MEDLINE (from 2010 to July 2013), EMBASE (from 2010 to July 2013), CINAHL (from 2010 to July 2013), article references and prospective trial registers.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-randomized controlled trials that compared CAS for ACL or PCL reconstruction versus conventional operating techniques not involving CAS.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently screened search results, assessed the risk of bias in the studies and extracted data. Where appropriate, we pooled data using risk ratios (RR) or mean differences (MD), both with 95% confidence intervals (CI).

MAIN RESULTS

The updated search resulted in the inclusion of one new study. This review now includes five RCTs with 366 participants. There were more female than male participants (70% were female); their ages ranged from 14 to 53 years. All trials involved ACL reconstructions performed by experienced surgeons.Assessing the studies' risk of bias was hampered by poor reporting of trial methods, and consequently several studies were judged to be 'unclear' for several types of bias. One trial presenting primary outcome data was at high risk of detection bias from lack of clinician blinding and attrition bias from an unaccounted loss to follow-up at two years.We found moderate quality evidence (three trials, 193 participants) of no clinically relevant difference between CAS and conventional surgery in International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) subjective scores (self-reported measure of knee function; scale of 0 to 100 where 100 was best function). Pooled data from two of these trials (120 participants) showed a small, but clinically irrelevant difference favouring CAS (MD 2.05, 95% CI -2.16 to 6.25). A third trial (73 participants) also found minimal difference in IKDC subjective scores (reported MD 0.2).We found low quality evidence (two trials, 120 participants) showing no difference between the two groups in Lysholm scores, also measured on a scale 0 to 100 where 100 is best function (MD 0.25, 95% CI -3.75 to 4.25). We found very low quality evidence (one trial, 40 participants) showing no difference between the two groups in Tegner scores. We found low quality evidence (three trials, 173 participants) showing the majority of participants in both groups were assessed as having normal or nearly normal knee function (86/87 with CAS versus 84/86 with no CAS; RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.96 to 1.06).Similarly, no differences were found for our secondary outcome measures of knee stability, loss in range of motion and tunnel placement. None of the trials reported on re-operation.No adverse post-surgical events were reported in two trials (133 participants); this outcome was not reported by the other three trials.CAS use was associated with longer operating times compared with conventional operating techniques: the mean difference in operating times reported in the studies ranged between 9 and 27 minutes.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

From the available evidence, we are unable to demonstrate or refute a favourable effect of CAS for cruciate ligament reconstructions of the knee compared with conventional reconstructions. However, the currently available evidence does not indicate that CAS in knee ligament reconstruction improves outcome. There is a need for improved reporting of future studies of this technology.

Knee shape might predict clinical outcome after an anterior cruciate ligament rupture

We have investigated whether shape of the knee can predict the clinical outcome of patients after an anterior cruciate ligament rupture. We used statistical shape modelling to measure the shape of the knee joint of 182 prospectively followed patients on lateral and Rosenberg view radiographs of the knee after a rupture of the anterior cruciate ligament. Subsequently, we associated knee shape with the International Knee Documentation Committee subjective score at two years follow-up. The mean age of patients was 31 years (21 to 51), the majority were male (n = 121) and treated operatively (n = 135). We found two modes (shape variations) that were significantly associated with the subjective score at two years: one for the operatively treated group (p = 0.002) and one for the non-operatively treated group (p = 0.003). Operatively treated patients who had higher subjective scores had a smaller intercondylar notch and a smaller width of the intercondylar eminence. Non-operatively treated patients who scored higher on the subjective score had a more pyramidal intercondylar notch as opposed to one that was more dome-shaped. We conclude that the shape of the femoral notch and the intercondylar eminence is predictive of clinical outcome two years after a rupture of the anterior cruciate ligament.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2014;96-B:737–42.

Accuracy of a computer-assisted planning and placement system for anatomical femoral tunnel positioning in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction

BACKGROUND

Femoral tunnel positioning is a difficult, but important factor in successful anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction. Computer navigation can improve the anatomical planning procedure besides the tunnel placement procedure.

METHODS

The accuracy of the computer-assisted femoral tunnel positioning method for anatomical double bundle ACL-reconstruction with a three-dimensional template was determined with respect to both aspects for AM and PL bundles in 12 cadaveric knees.

RESULTS

The accuracy of the total tunnel positioning procedure was 2.7 mm (AM) and 3.2 mm (PL). These values consisted of the accuracies for planning (AM:2.9 mm; PL:3.2 mm) and for placement (about 0.4 mm). The template showed a systematic bias for the PL-position.

CONCLUSIONS

The computer-assisted templating method showed high accuracy for tunnel placement and has promising capacity for application in anatomical tunnel planning. Improvement of the template will result in an accurate and robust navigation system for femoral tunnel positioning in ACL-reconstruction.

Double-bundle ACL reconstruction: novice surgeons utilizing computer-assisted navigation versus experienced surgeons

PURPOSE

Anatomic double-bundle ACL reconstruction presents a unique technical challenge for surgeons, requiring precise placement of multiple tunnels in a relatively small area. As the necessity of anatomic reconstruction has been stressed throughout the literature, developing a method to consistently improve the accuracy and precision of tunnel placement is essential. We aimed to investigate whether computer-assisted navigation allows novice surgeons to place double-bundle ACL tunnels with a similar degree of accuracy to experienced surgeons operating without computer assistance.

METHODS

A novice surgeon group comprising three medical students performed double-bundle ACL reconstruction using passive computer-assisted navigation in 11 cadaver knees. Their individual results were compared to those of three experienced orthopaedic surgeons, each performing the identical procedure without the use of computer-assisted navigation in 9 cadaver knees.

RESULTS AND CONCLUSION

There were no significant differences in placement of either the AM or PL tunnels on the tibial plateau between the novice surgeons using computer-assisted navigation and the experienced surgeons. However, on the lateral femoral condyle, the novice surgeons placed the AM and PL tunnels significantly more anterior along Blumensaat's line, on average, compared to the experienced surgeons.

Applications of computer navigation in sports medicine knee surgery: an evidence-based review

Computer-assisted surgery (CAS) has been investigated in a number of sports medicine procedures in the knee. Current barriers to its widespread introduction include increased costs, duration, and invasiveness of surgery. Randomized trials on the use of CAS in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction have failed to demonstrate a clinical benefit. Data on CAS use in high tibial osteotomy are more promising; however, long-term studies are lacking. CAS has a number of research applications in knee ligament surgery, and studies continue to explore its use in the treatment of osteochondral lesions. This article reviews the applications of CAS in sports medicine knee surgery and summarizes current literature on clinical outcomes.

Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score or International Knee Documentation Committee Subjective Knee Form: which questionnaire is most useful to monitor patients with an anterior cruciate ligament rupture in the short term?

PURPOSE

To evaluate which questionnaire, the Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) or the International Knee Documentation Committee Subjective Knee Form (IKDC subjective), is most useful to evaluate patients with recent anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) ruptures or those within 1 year of an ACL reconstruction.

METHODS

Patients with recent (0-6 months) ACL ruptures or those with indications for ACL reconstruction were included. All patients completed the questionnaires shortly after trauma or preoperatively and again 1 year later. The KOOS has 5 subscales, each scored separately. The IKDC subjective consists of one total score. The following measurement properties of the KOOS and IKDC subjective were assessed: content validity (n = 45), construct validity (n = 100), test-retest reliability (n = 50), and responsiveness (n = 50).

RESULTS

Regarding content validity, 2 KOOS subscales (Pain and Activities of Daily Living) were scored as nonrelevant. Two of the 18 questions on the IKDC subjective were assessed as nonrelevant. Only the KOOS subscale Sport and Recreation Function had acceptable construct validity (79% confirmation of the predefined hypotheses). None of the KOOS subscales had a sufficient score for responsiveness (<75% confirmation of the predefined hypotheses). The IKDC subjective scored acceptable for construct validity (84% confirmation of the predefined hypotheses) and responsiveness (86% confirmation of the predefined hypotheses). All KOOS subscales and the IKDC subjective had a reliability (intraclass correlation coefficient [ICC]) of 0.81 or higher.

CONCLUSIONS

The IKDC subjective is more useful than the KOOS questionnaire to evaluate both patients with recent ACL ruptures and those in the first year after ACL reconstruction.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III, prognostic validation study.