Tunnel position and graft orientation in failed anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a clinical and imaging analysis.

Bioengineering Laboratory, Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Massachusetts General Hospital/Harvard Medical School, 55 Fruit St., GRJ 1215, Boston, MA 02114, USA.
International Orthopaedics (Impact Factor: 2.02). 08/2011; 36(4):845-52. DOI: 10.1007/s00264-011-1333-4
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT It has been reported that technical error in positioning the graft tunnel is the most common problem in anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction. The objective of this study was to quantitatively evaluate femoral and tibial tunnel positions and intra-articular graft orientation of primary ACL reconstruction in patients who had undergone revision ACL reconstruction. We postulated that this patient cohort had a nonanatomically positioned tunnel and graft orientation.
Twenty-six patients who had undergone a revision ACL were investigated. Clinical magnetic resonance (MR) images prior to revision were analysed. Three-dimensional models of bones and tunnels on the femur and tibia were created. Intra-articular graft orientation was measured in axial, sagittal and coronal planes. Graft positions were measured on the tibial plateau as a percentage from anterior to posterior and medial to lateral; graft positions on the femur were measured using the quadrant method.
Sagittal elevation angle for failed ACL reconstruction graft (69.6° ± 13.4°) was significantly greater (p < 0.05) than that of the native anteromedial (AM) and posterolateral (PL) bundles of the ACL (AM 56.2° ± 6.1°, PL 55.5° ± 8.1°). In the transverse plane, the deviation angle of the failed graft (37.3° ± 21.0°) was significantly greater than native ACL bundles. The tibial tunnel in this patient cohort was placed posteromedially and medially to the anatomical AM and PL bundles, respectively. The femoral tunnel was placed anteriorly to the anatomical AM and PL bundles.
This study reveals that both the tibial and femoral tunnel positions and consequently the intra-articular graft orientation in this patient group with failed ACL reconstruction were nonanatomical when compared with native ACL values. The results can be used to improve tunnel placement in ACL reconstruction.

  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Correct anatomic tunnel positions are essential in anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction. To establish recommendations for tunnel positioning based on anatomical findings and to compare tunnel positions with clinical results, different radiological measurement methods as the quadrant method exist. Comparing the data of different observers requires the validation of the reliability of measurement methods. The purpose of this study therefore was to determine the reliability of the quadrant method to measure tunnel positions in ACL reconstruction. The hypothesis was, that the quadrant method shows a low inter- and intraobserver variability. In a test/retest scenario 20 knee surgeons were asked to determine defined tunnel positions in five lateral radiographs applying the quadrant method. Rotation, angle deviation, height and depth of the quadrant as well as absolute and relative tunnel positions of each observation were measured along referenced scales. Mean sizes and angle deviations of the quadrants, tunnel positions and deviations between the test/retest positions were calculated as well as standard deviations and range. Interobserver variability analyses, to plan as well as to determine tunnel positions in ACL reconstruction, showed a mean variability (SD) of <1 mm, with ranges of 2.5 mm for planning and 3.7 mm for determination of tunnel positions using the quadrant method. Intraobserver analysis showed mean variability with deviations of <1 mm and maximum standard deviations of 0.7 mm and ranges of up to 2.3 mm. We confirmed the hypothesis that the quadrant method has a low inter- and intraobserver variability. Based on the presented validation data, the quadrant method can be recommended as reliable method to radiographically describe insertion areas of the ACL as well as to determine tunnel positions in ACL reconstruction intra and postoperatively.
    Archives of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery 01/2014; · 1.36 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) revision surgery is a demanding procedure and requires meticulous pre-operative clinical and radiological assessment. In clinical practice the position of the femoral tunnel is identified mainly using plain radiographs (XR). Two-dimensional computed tomography (2D-CT) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) are not yet routine imaging methods and are only performed in specific clinical indications or in the scientific setting. Several measurement methods describe the femoral tunnel after ACL reconstruction and indicate 'ideal or wrong' placement to the surgeon. The aim of this study is to provide a reliable measurement method to predict potential conflict between the pre-existing and the planned femoral tunnel entrance area (FTEA). Ten patients with primary ACL reconstruction served as a reference group to describe our desired FTEA. Their femoral tunnel positioning was measured on XR and 2D-CT according to published measurement methods. These results were compared to the FTEA measured with a new technique on 3-dimensionally reconstructed CT-images (3D-CT) based on intra-operative landmarks. Twenty patients requiring ACL revision surgery underwent identical radiological examination. The mean values of the reference group were compared to each measurement of the patients requiring revision surgery. 3D-CT measurements found potential conflicts in nine out of 20 patients, which all proved to be true during arthroscopic revision surgery. Only one of these patients was identified in all XR and 2D-CT measurements. In 12 out of all 30 patients some measurements on XR or 2D-CT could not be recorded. 3D-CT reconstruction shows the most accuracy in depicting conflict of the pre-existing and desired femoral tunnel prior to ACL revision surgery. The desired FTEA must be defined for each surgeon and his individual technique. In contrast, precision of conventional measurement techniques on XR and 2D-CT is low and does not qualify for this purpose.
    International Orthopaedics 10/2013; · 2.02 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: It currently remains unclear whether the meniscal repair clinical results were affected by the graft used in anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction. This retrospective study designed to evaluate the difference in clinical outcomes of meniscal repair using autograft and allograft for the ACL reconstruction. The injury of the ACL and meniscus was evaluated with MRI and treated simultaneously. One hundred and eighty-nine cases were initially fulfilled the study criteria, and had the surgery in the period June 2007 and July 2010. Thirty-four patients were lost to follow-up. Seventy-five patients underwent meniscus repair with autograft reconstruction of the ACL (autograft group) and 80 patients underwent meniscus repair with allograft reconstruction of the ACL (allograft group). The meniscus healing rate based on the clinical examination of Barrett's criteria was 81.3 % (61/75) in the autograft group and 80.0 % (64/80) in the allograft (P > 0.05). There was no significant difference in the Lysholm scores in the allograft group compared to the allograft group (89.1 ± 10.6 versus 88.7 ± 11.2, P > 0.05). The values of immunoglobulin's and complements (IgG, IgA, IgM, C3 and C4) were not significantly different between the two groups (P > 0.05). The data support our assumption that patients undergoing meniscal repair associated with ACL reconstruction with allograft had good clinical outcomes. Although allograft implantation induces an immunological response on a subclinical level, there were no signs of allograft affecting the nature of meniscus healing.
    Archives of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery 01/2014; · 1.36 Impact Factor

Full-text (2 Sources)

Available from
May 31, 2014