The purpose of this study was to determine the incidence of graft-tunnel mismatch (GTM) when performing anatomic anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) using bone-patella tendon-bone (BPTB) grafts and anteromedial portal drilling.

Beginning in November 2018, 100 consecutive patients who underwent ACLR by two sports fellowship-trained, orthopedic surgeons using BPTB autograft and anteromedial portal drilling were prospectively identified. The BPTB graft dimensions and the femoral tunnel distance, tibial tunnel distance, intra-articular distance, and total distance were measured. Surgeons determined the depth and angle of tunnels based on the patella tendon graft length dimensions in each case. After passage of the graft, the distance from the distal graft tip to the tibial cortex aperture was measured. GTM was defined as the need for additional measures to obtain satisfactory tibial graft fixation (< 1 5e20 mm of bone fixation).

The incidence of mismatch was 6/100 (6%). Five cases involved the graft being too long, with the tibial bone plug protruding excessively from the tibial tunneld4/5 had a patella tendon length ? 50 mm. Three cases were managed with femoral tunnel recession, and two were treated with a free bone plug technique. One patient with a patella tendon length of 35 mm had a graft that was too short, with the tibial bone plug recessed in the tibial tunnel. Of patients whose tibial tunnel distance was within 5 mm of the patella tendon length, only 1/46 (2%) patients had mismatch, whereas 5/54 (9%) of patients who had >5 mm difference had mismatch.

The incidence of grafttunnel mismatch after anatomic ACLR using BTPB and anteromedial portal drilling in this study is 6%. To limit the occurrence of GTM where the graft is too long, surgeons should drill tibial tunnel distances within 5 mm of the patella tendon length.

Graft-tunnel mismatch of the bone-patellar tendon-bone (BPTB) graft is a major concern during anatomical anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction if the femoral tunnel is positioned using a far medial portal technique, as the femoral tunnel tends to be shorter compared with that positioned using a transtibial portal technique. This study describes an accurate method of calculating the ideal length of bone plugs of a BPTB graft required to avoid graft–tunnel mismatch during anatomical ACL reconstruction using a far medial portal technique of femoral tunnel positioning. Based on data obtained intra-operatively from 60 anatomical ACL reconstruction procedures, we calculated the length of bone plugs required in the BPTB graft to avoid graft–tunnel mismatch. When this was prevented in all the 60 cases, we found that the mean length of femoral bone plug that remained in contact with the interference screw within the femoral tunnel was 14 mm (12 to 22) and the mean length of tibial bone plug that remained in contact with the interference screw within the tibial tunnel was 23 mm (18 to 28). These results were used to validate theoretical formulae developed to predict the required length of bone plugs in BPTB graft during anatomical ACL reconstruction using a far medial portal technique. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2015;97-B:324–8

Endoscopic methods of ACL reconstruction have shown some disadvantages such as the inability to freely position the femoral tunnel. Moreover, this technique dictates relatively vertical and central non anatomical graft placement compared to the more horizontal and lateral course of the native ACL. The ACL presents a collection of individual fibers that are grouping in two distinct bands, anteromedial (AM) and posterolateral (PL). The most anterior fibers of AM band are the most isometric. The majority of ACL fibers lie posteriorly to the isometric point on the medial wall of the femoral condyle. These fibers are lax during flexion and tight in extension. This behaviour was defined “favourable non isometry”. The “favourable non isometry” is very interesting because increased knee loading often occurs at flexion angles of less than 60 degrees. Classic two-incision technique, using a rear-entry drill, our two-incision technique, or the Clancy anatomic endoscopic technique using flexible reamers and use of different not commonly arthroscopic portals seems to allow a predictable, near-anatomic placement of femoral tunnel.

Purpose

The purpose of this study was to determine whether intra-operative identification of osseous ridge anatomy (lateral intercondylar “residents” ridge and lateral bifurcate ridge) could be used to reliably define and reconstruct individuals' native femoral ACL attachments in both single-bundle (SB) and double-bundle (DB) cases.

Aims. To investigate the risk factors for progression of articular cartilage damage after anatomical anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction. Patients and Methods. A total of 174 patients who underwent second-look arthroscopic evaluation after anatomical ACL reconstruction were enrolled in this study. The graded condition of the articular cartilage at the time of ACL reconstruction was compared with that at second-look arthroscopy. Age, gender, body mass index (BMI), ACL reconstruction technique, meniscal conditions, and other variables were assessed by regression analysis as risk factors for progression of damage to the articular cartilage. Results. In the medial compartment, multivariable logistic regression analysis indicated that partial medial meniscectomy (odds ratio (OR) 6.82, 95% confidence interval (CI) 2.11 to 22.04, p = 0.001), pivot-shift test grade at the final follow-up (OR 3.53, CI 1.39 to 8.96, p = 0.008), BMI (OR 1.15, CI 1.03 to 1.28, p = 0.015) and medial meniscal repair (OR 3.19, CI 1.24 to 8.21, p = 0.016) were significant risk factors for progression of cartilage damage. In the lateral compartment, partial lateral meniscectomy (OR 10.94, CI 4.14 to 28.92, p < 0.001) and side-to-side differences in anterior knee laxity at follow-up (OR 0.63, p = 0.001) were significant risk factors. Conclusion. Partial meniscectomy was found to be strongly associated with the progression of articular cartilage damage despite r anatomical ACL reconstruction. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2018;100-B:285–93

The Anterior Cruciate Ligament (ACL) plays a vital role in maintaining function and stability in the knee. Over the last several decades, much research has been focused on elucidating the anatomy, structural properties, biomechanics, pathology, and optimal treatments for the ACL. Through careful and objective study, the ACL can be understood to be a dynamic structure, rich in neurovascular supply. Although it is referred to as one ligament, it is comprised of two dis-tinct bundles which function synergistically to facilitate normal knee kinematics. The bony morphology of the knee defines normal knee kinematics, as well as the nature of the soft-tissue structures about the knee. Characterized by individual uniqueness, bony morphology varies from patient to patient. The ACL, which is a reflection of each patient's unique bony morphol-ogy, is inherently subject to both anatomic and morphologic variation as well. Furthermore, the ACL is subject to physiologic aging, which can affect the anatomic and structural properties of the ligament over time. A successful anatomic ACL Reconstruction, which may be considered the functional restoration of the ACL to its native dimensions, collagen orientation, and inser-tion sites according to individual anatomy, considers all these principles. It is vital to respect the nature we observe, rather than to “create” nature to fit a one-size-fits-all surgery. Double bundle ACL Reconstruction may therefore be thought of more as a concept rather than a specific technique, one that respects the individual unique anatomy of each patient to provide a truly indi-vidualized, anatomic, and value-based ACL Reconstruction

Background:. The Lateral Intercondylar Ridge (LIR) gained notoriety with arthroscopic trans-tibial Anterior Cruciate Ligament (ACL) reconstruction where it was mistakenly used to position the ‘over the top’ guide resulting in graft malposition. With anatomic ACL reconstruction some surgeons use the same ridge to define the anterior margin of the ACL femoral insertion in order to guide graft placement. However there is debate about whether this ridge is a consistent and reliable anatomical structure. The aim of our study was to identify whether the LIR is a consistent anatomical structure and to define its relationship with the femoral ACL insertion. Methods:. In the first part, we studied 23 dry bone specimens. Using a digital microscribe, we created a 3D model of the medial surface of the lateral femoral condyle to evaluate whether there was an identifiable bony ridge. In the second part, we studied 7 cadaveric specimens with soft tissues intact. The soft tissues were dissected to identify the femoral ACL insertion. A 3D reconstruction of the femoral insertion and the surface allowed us to define the relationship between the LIR and the ACL insertion. Results:. All specimens (23 dry bones; 7 intact soft tissues) had a defined ridge on the medial surface of the lateral femoral condyle. The ridge extends from the apex point of the lateral intercondylar notch, where the posterior condyle meets the femoral shaft, and extends obliquely to the articular margin. The mean distance from the midpoint of the posterior condylar articular margin was 10.1 mm. The ridge was consistently located just anterior to the femoral ACL insertion. Conclusion:. This study shows that the LIR is a consistent anatomical structure that defines the anterior margin of the femoral ACL insertion. This supports its use as a landmark for femoral tunnel placement in ACL reconstruction surgery. Abstract 28

Introduction. Multiple ACL revisions represent an extremely demanding surgery, due to the presence of enlarged or malpositioned tunnels, hardware, injuries to the secondary stabilizers and difficulties in retrieving autologous tendons. An anatomical ACL reconstruction is not always possible. We analyzed the results in a series of patients operated with over the top reconstruction (OTTR) and lateral extra-articular plasty to the Gerdy's tubercle (LP) using Achilles (AT) or tibialis posterior tendon (TPT) allografts. Methods. From 2002 to 2008, twenty-four male athletes with a mean age of 30.8 years were operated. 20 of the patients had two, while four patients had three previous reconstructions. IKDC score and KT evaluation were used at a mean 3.3 years follow-up (2–7 years). Results. The mean IKDC subjective score at follow-up was 81.3. The IKDC objective score rated A or B in 84% of the patients. Of the 20 good results, 17 patients resumed sport activity at the pre-injury level. KT side-to-side difference averaged 3.5 mm in the TPT, versus 3.2 mm in the AT group. No significant differences were noted between the AT and TPT group. Conclusions. Multiple ACL revision surgery is a salvage procedure, with average good results, but not equivalent to primary ACL reconstruction. Patients should be advised that a return to sports may not be feasible. OTTR+LP is an established technique that permits to overcome difficult anatomical situations, with cortical fixation providing good immediate stability and avoiding tunnel fixation and bone grafting. Long tendon grafts as AT and TPT are needed

Cadaveric experiments using knee testing machines have suggested that anatomical ACL reconstruction, replacing both antero-medial (AM) and postero-lateral (PL) bundles, restores knee rotation kinematics more effectively than does a single-bundle. The aim of this study was to measure intra-operatively the control of the translation and coupled rotations that occur with standard clinical laxity tests (anterior drawer, Lachman and pivot shift). The knee kinematics of 10 patients were measured using a surgical navigation system and described in terms of tibial axial rotation and antero-posterior translation. In the ACL deficient knee, the average maximum tibial rotation during the pivot shift test was 29.0° and the mean maximum translation 17.0 mm. Reconstruction of the AM bundle (which behaves in a biomechanically similar way to a single-bundle reconstruction) reduced the rotational component to 16.4° (p< 0.0001) and translation to 6 mm (p = 0.0002). Addition of the PL bundle further reduced rotation to 12.6° (p = 0.0007) but had no significant effect on translation. Addition of the PL bundle also significantly reduced coupled tibial internal rotation during the Lachman and Anterior draw tests. The pivot shift test simulates the instability suffered by patients with ACL deficiency and this study suggests that its rotational component is better restrained by anatomical, 2 bundle ACL reconstruction

Over the last two decades, anatomic anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstructions have gained popularity, while the use of extraarticular reconstructions has decreased. However, the biomechanical rationale behind the lateral extraarticular sling has not been adequately studied. By understanding its effect on knee stability, it may be possible to identify specific situations in which lateral extraarticular tenodesis may be advantageous. The primary objective of this study was to quantify the ability of a lateral extraarticular sling to restore native kinematics to the ACL deficient knee, with and without combined intraarticular anatomic ACL reconstruction. Additionally, we aimed to characterise the isometry of four possible femoral tunnel positions for the lateral extraarticular sling. Eight fresh frozen hip-to-toe cadavers were used in this study. Navigated Lachman and mechanised pivot shift examinations were performed on ACL itact and deficient knees. Three reconstruction strategies were evaluated: Single bundle anatomic intraarticular ACL reconstruction, Lateral extraarticular sling, Combined intraarticular ACL reconstruction and lateral extraarticular sling. After all stability tests were completed, we quantified the isometry of four possible femoral tunnel positions for the lateral extraarticular sling using the Surgetics navigation system. A single tibial tunnel position was identified and digitised over Gerdy's tubercle. Four possible graft positions were identified on the lateral femoral condyle: the top of the lateral collateral ligament (LCL); the top of the septum; the ideal tunnel position, as defined by the navigation system's own algorithm; and the actual tunnel position used during testing, described in the literature as the intersection of the linear projections of the LCL and the septum over the lateral femoral condyle. For each of the four tunnel positions, the knee was cycled from 0 to 90® of flexion and fiber length was recorded at 30® intervals, therefore quantiying the magnitude of anisometry for each tunnel position. Stability testing: Sectioning of the ACL resulted in an increase in Lachman (15mm, p = 0.01) and mechanised pivot shift examination (6.75mm, p = 0.04) in all specimens compared with the intact knee. Anatomic intraarticular ACL reconstruction restored the Lachman (6.7mm, p = 3.76) and pivot shift (−3.5mm, p = 0.85) to the intact state. With lateral extraarticular sling alone, there was a trend towards increased anterior translation with the Lachman test (9.2mm, p = 0.50). This reconstruction restored the pivot shift to the intact state. (1.25mm, p = 0.73). Combined intraarticular and extraarticular reconstruction restored the Lachman (6.2mm, p = 2.11) and pivot shift (−3.75mm, p = 0.41) to the intact state. There was no significant difference between intraarticular alone and combined intraarticular and extraarticular reconstruction. (p = 1.88). Isometry: The ideal tunnel position calculated by the navigation system was identified over the lateral femoral condyle, beneath the mid-portion of the LCL. The anisometry for the ideal tunnel position was significantly lower (5.9mm; SD = 1.8mm; P<0.05) than the anisometry of the actual graft position (14.9mm; SD = 4mm), the top of the LCL (13.9mm; SD = 4.3mm) and the top of the septum (12mm; SD = 2.4mm). In the isolated acute ACL deficient knee, the addition of a lateral extraarticular sling to anatomic intraarticular ACL reconstruction provides little biomechanical advantage and is not routinely recommended. Isolated lateral extraarticular sling does control the pivot shift, and may be an option in the revision setting or in the lower demand patient with functional instability. Additionally, the location of the femoral tunnel traditionally used results in a significantly more anisometric graft than the navigation's system mathematical ideal location. However, the location of this ideal tunnel placement lies beneath mid-portion of the fibers of the LCL, which would not be clinically feasible

The October 2013 Knee Roundup³⁶⁰ looks at: Make it easy, release the MCL; Do patients remember clinical information in day surgery?; Osteoarthritis and arthroscopy?; How best to double your bundles; When to operate for infection; Cementless unicompartment knee replacement?; Tibial tubercle-trochlear groove confusion; Tarts, cherries and osteoarthritis

A total of 218 patients with unilateral anterior cruciate ligament deficiency were randomly assigned to one of four groups. In group A an anatomical double bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction was performed; group B were treated by a single bundle using an Endobutton for femoral fixation; in group C by a single bundle using RigidFix cross pins for femoral fixation; and in group D by a single bundle using a bioabsorbable TransFix II screw for femoral fixation. For tibial fixation a bioabsorbable Intrafix interference screw was used for all the groups and the graft was fashioned from the semitendinosus and gracilis tendons in all patients. In all, 18 patients were lost to follow-up. The remaining 200 were subjected to a clinical evaluation, with assessment of the anterior drawer, Lachman’s and the pivot-shift tests, and KT-1000 arthrometer measurement. They also completed the International Knee Documentation Committee, Lysholm knee and Tegner activity scores.

At a mean of 29 months (25 to 38) follow-up there were no significant differences concerning time between injury and range of movement and Lysholm knee scores among the four groups. However, the double bundle method showed significantly better results for the pivot-shift test (p = 0.002). The KT 1000 measurements showed a mean difference between the reconstructed knee and the patients’ normal knee of 1.4 mm in the double bundle group and 2.4 mm in the single bundle group; which was statistically significant. The Lachman and anterior drawer tests also showed superior results for the double bundle method. The International Knee Documentation Committee scale showed no significant difference among the groups (p < 0.001).

On clinical evaluation the double bundle group showed less laxity than the single bundle groups. However, regardless of the technique, all knees were improved by anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction compared with their pre-operative status.