Abstract
Aim: To compare the ability of two different PLC reconstruction techniques to restore the kinematics of a PCL & PLC deficient knee to PCL deficient condition.
Methods: 8 fresh frozen cadaver knees were used. A custom rig with electromagnetic tracking system measured knee kinematics. Each knee was tested with posterior & anterior drawer forces of 80N, external rotation moment of 5Nm & varus moment of 5Nm when intact, after dividing PCL, PLC (lateral collateral ligament & popliteus tendon), after PLC reconstruction type1 (1PLC) & PLC reconstruction type 2 (2PLC). 1PLC was modification of Larson’s technique with semitendinosus graft. 2PLC was performed with semitendinosus graft to reconstruct the lateral collateral ligament & the pop-liteofibular ligament, gracillis used to reconstruct pop-liteus tendon.
Results: The one-tailed paired student’s t test with Bon-ferroni correction was used to analyse the data. Only in deep flexion 2PLC reconstruction was significantly better than the 1PLC reconstruction in restoring the posterior laxity to PCL deficient condition (p=0.02). (Figure1) In deep flexion 1PLC could not restore the rotational laxity to PCL deficient condition (p=0.02). In mid flexion the 2PLC was unable to restore the rotational laxity to PCL deficient condition (p=0.048) (Figure 2).
Conclusion: The 2PLC reconstruction was better than the 1PCL in controlling the posterior drawer. The 1PLC technique though not significant tended to over constrain the external & varus rotations.
Correspondence should be addressed to Mr Tim Wilton, BASK at the Royal College of Surgeons, 35–43 Lincoln’s Inn Fields, London WC2A 3PE.
