Abstract
Aim: To analyse the posterior and external rotational laxities in single bundle PCL (sPCL) and double bundle PCL reconstruction (dPCL) in a PCL and PLC deficient knee.
Methods: Ten fresh frozen were used. A custom made wooden rig with electromagnetic tracking was used to measured knee kinematics. Each knee was tested with posterior and anterior drawer forces of 80N and an external rotation moment of 5Nm when intact, after PCL resection, after dividing the PLC and after performing dPCL and sPCL reconstructions with a bone patellar tendon bone allograft and tibial inlay technique.
Results: The one-tailed paired Student’s t test with Bon-ferroni correction was used. There was a significant difference between the ability of the dPCL and sPCL reconstruction to correct the posterior drawer in extension (p=0.002). There was no difference between the dPCL reconstruction and the intact condition of the knee near extension (p=0.142, Fig 1). There was no significant difference between the intact condition and both sPCL (p=0.26) and dPCL (p=0.20) reconstructions in flexion in restoring posterior laxity. Neither of the reconstructions could restore the rotational laxity (Fig 3).
Conclusion: In a combined PCL and PLC deficient knee the posterior laxity can be controlled by both the sPCL as well as the dPCL reconstructions except near extension where the dPCL reconstruction was better.
Correspondence should be addressed to Mr Tim Wilton, BASK at the Royal College of Surgeons, 35–43 Lincoln’s Inn Fields, London WC2A 3PE.
