Abstract
It appears that double bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction can reproduce the original anatomy of the ligament, restoring normal kinematics and rotational control of the tibia. But an anatomical single bundle reconstruction may present very similar results, with minor technical difficulties and lower costs.
We compared two groups of 25 patients each, that underwent ACL reconstruction by the same surgeon, with a follow-up of 12–36 months. One group had double bundle reconstruction with hamstring and the other had single bundle anatomical reconstruction with patellar tendon.
Patients underwent a subjective evaluation and clinical testing with instrumented laxity with Rolimeter, and the data entered in the IKDC 2000 scale Double tunnel hamstring Vs bone-tendon-bone: Functional outcome of 85.6% Global Class A and B vs. 82.1% Class A and B. The subjective outcome (IKDC 2000) was 90.93 vs. 91.47. Pivot-shift test with 87% patients in class A and class B at 9.7% Vs 75% patients in class A, 21.4% for class B. The Rolimeter gave an average Lachman value of 2,56 and anterior drawer test of 2,88 Vs average Lachman value of 3.59 and anterior drawer test of 2.92. One leg hop test showed 85.7% knees class A, 9.5% knees class B vs. 90.4% knees class A and, 2.8% knees class B.
The subjective score was slightly higher in the single bundle anatomical reconstruction with patellar tendon, despite the overall functional outcome being higher in the double tunnel technique with hamstrings. The average Lachmann in the patellar tendon group was 1 mm higher. The rotational stability in the double tunnel was higher.
The same surgeon had better results in the double tunnel hamstrings technique, despite less experienced with this technique, which is more demanding, probably reflecting objective advantages over the single bundle reconstruction with patellar tendon
