Increased Risk of Revision After Anteromedial Compared With Transtibial Drilling of the Femoral Tunnel During Primary Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: Results from the Danish Knee Ligament Reconstruction Register

Department of Clinical Epidemiology, Aarhus University Hospital, Aarhus, Denmark. Electronic address: .
Arthroscopy The Journal of Arthroscopic and Related Surgery (Impact Factor: 3.21). 01/2013; 29(1):98-105. DOI: 10.1016/j.arthro.2012.09.009
Source: PubMed


The goal was to study revision rates and clinical outcome after anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction using the anteromedial (AM) technique versus the transtibial (TT) technique for femoral drill hole placement.
A total of 9,239 primary ACL reconstruction procedures were registered in the Danish Knee Ligament Reconstruction Register between January 2007 and December 2010. The failure of the 2 different femoral drilling techniques was determined using revision ACL reconstruction as the primary endpoint. As secondary endpoints, we used the pivot-shift test and instrumented objective test as well as patient-reported outcome, registered in the Danish Knee Ligament Reconstruction Register. Relative risks (RRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated.
We identified 1,945 AM and 6,430 TT primary ACL procedures. The cumulative revision rates for ACL reconstruction after 4 years with the AM and TT techniques were 5.16% (95% CI: 3.61%, 7.34%) and 3.20% (95% CI: 2.51%, 4.08%), respectively. The adjusted overall RR for revision ACL surgery in the AM group was 2.04 (95% CI: 1.39, 2.99), compared with the TT group. Use of the AM technique increased from 13% of all operations in 2007 to 40% in 2010. AM technique was further associated with increased RRs of positive pivot shift of 2.86 (95% CI: 2.40, 3.41) and sagittal instability of 3.70 (95% CI: 3.09, 4.43), compared with the TT technique.
This study found an increased risk of revision ACL surgery when using the AM technique for femoral drill hole placement, compared with the TT technique, in the crude data as well as the stratified and adjusted data. Our finding could be explained by technical failures resulting from introduction of a new and more complex procedure or by the hypothesis put forward in prior studies that compared with a nonanatomic graft placement, a greater force is carried by the anatomic ACL reconstruction and, hence, there is a concomitant higher risk of ACL rupture.
Level II, prospective comparative study.

Download full-text


Available from: Theis Muncholm Thillemann, Oct 01, 2015
1 Follower
194 Reads
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: To examine the relationship between the radiographically assessed placement of the tibial tunnel and the long-term clinical and subjective outcome in anterior cruciate ligament-reconstructed patients. Patients were examined clinically, with subjective score systems and with standardised radiographs 10-12 years postoperatively. Only patients reconstructed with the aid of the 70-degree tibial drill guide were included. A posterior placement of the tibial tunnel was defined as >50 % along the Amis and Jakob line (AJL). A high tunnel inclination was defined as >75° in the coronal plane. The possible linear relationships between clinical findings, subjective scores and tibial tunnel placement were investigated. Eighty-six percentage of the 96 patients were available for examination. Mean tibial tunnel inclination was 71.1° (SD 4.2). No difference was found in subjective scores and knee stability between high (14 %) and low (86 %) inclination groups. Mean placement of the tibial tunnel along the AJL was 46 % (SD 5). Patients with a posterior tibial tunnel placement (24 %) had a higher incidence of rotational instability (P = 0.02). Patients with rotational instability (grade 2 pivot shift) had significant lower Lysholm score than those with grade 0 and 1 rotational instability (P = 0.001). The use of a tibial drill guide that relates to the femoral roof leads to a posterior tibial tunnel placement (>50 % of the tibial AP-diameter) in 24 % of the patients. These patients have a significant higher proportion of rotational instability and worse subjective outcome. Case series, Level IV.
    Knee Surgery Sports Traumatology Arthroscopy 07/2013; 22(5). DOI:10.1007/s00167-013-2593-x · 3.05 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The aim of this study was to validate the registration in the Danish Knee Ligament Reconstruction Register (DKRR) by assessing the registration completeness of the anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction code and detecting the validity of important key variables. Furthermore, we assessed data quality of patient-related outcome scores. All operation codes for ACL reconstruction from 2005-2011 were identified in the Danish National Registry of Patients and were compared with the cases registered in the DKRR to compute the completeness of registration. We also assessed the validity of key variables in the DKRR using medical records as a reference standard to compute the positive predictive value. Finally, we assessed potential differences between responders and nonresponders to subjective patient-related outcome scores (Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score [KOOS] and Tegner scores) 1 year after surgery. The completeness of the registration of patients in the DKRR increased from 60% (2005) to 86% (2011). Large-volume hospitals had a higher completeness than small-volume hospitals. With a positive predictive value between 85%-100%, the validity of key variables was good. KOOS scores versus Tegner scores for responders and nonresponders were comparable. The results show a good registration of ACL reconstruction procedures in the DKRR, but there is room for improvement mainly at small-volume hospitals. Overall, the validity of the key variables in the DKRR was good and no difference was found in KOOS and Tegner scores for responders versus nonresponders. Therefore, we conclude that the DKRR is a valid source for future research.
    Clinical Epidemiology 07/2013; 5(1):219-28. DOI:10.2147/CLEP.S45752
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Recent efforts to improve the results of anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction have focused on placing the femoral tunnel anatomically. Medial portal femoral tunnel techniques facilitate drilling of femoral tunnels that are more anatomic than those made with transtibial techniques. Few studies have compared the clinical outcomes of these two femoral tunnel techniques. We hypothesized that the transtibial technique is associated with decreased Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Scores (KOOS) and an increased risk of repeat surgery in the ipsilateral knee when compared with the anteromedial portal technique. Four hundred and thirty-six patients who had undergone primary isolated autograft ACL reconstruction with a transtibial (229 patients) or anteromedial portal (207 patients) technique in 2002 or 2003 were identified in a prospective multicenter cohort. A multiple linear regression model was used to determine whether surgical technique (transtibial or anteromedial portal) was a significant predictor of KOOS at six years postoperatively, after controlling for preoperative KOOS, patient age, sex, activity level, body mass index (BMI), smoking status, graft type, and the presence of meniscal and chondral pathology at the time of reconstruction. A multiple logistic regression model was used to determine whether surgical technique was a significant predictor of repeat ipsilateral knee surgery, after controlling for patient age and activity level, graft type, and meniscal pathology at the time of reconstruction. Postoperative KOOS were available for 387 patients (88.8%). Femoral tunnel drilling technique was not a predictor of the KOOS Quality of Life subscore (p = 0.72) or KOOS Function, Sports and Recreational Activities subscore (p = 0.36) at the six-year follow-up evaluation. Data regarding the prevalence of repeat surgery were available for 380 patients. Femoral tunnel technique was a significant predictor of subsequent ipsilateral knee surgery (odds ratio [OR] = 2.49, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.30 to 4.78, p = 0.006). Patients who underwent ACL reconstruction with a transtibial technique had significantly higher odds of undergoing repeat ipsilateral knee surgery relative to those who underwent reconstruction with an anteromedial portal technique. Therapeutic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.
    The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery 11/2013; 95(22):2035-2042. DOI:10.2106/JBJS.M.00187 · 5.28 Impact Factor
Show more