Do Hyun Moon

Comparison of tunnel locations of double bundle ACL reconstruction using the conventional transtibial technique with anatomic tunnel locations using a 3D CT model

IntroductionThe purposes of this study were: (1) to compare tunnel locations using the conventional transtibial technique with reference data, and (2) to identify factors that make it difficult to position the femoral tunnel correctly or contribute to breakage of the bone bridge between the two tibial tunnels.Materials and methodsA prospective study was performed on 28 patients who underwent double bundle ACL reconstruction. Locations of each tunnel were determined using an anatomic coordinate axes method (ACAM). Measurements included: thickness of the bone bridge between tibial two tunnels (BB), height from the union (HU) point to expected joint surface, the ratio between the length of Blumensaat’s line and the anterior–posterior length of the lateral femoral condyle (RBL), and the ratio between anterior–posterior and proximal–distal lengths of the medial wall of the lateral femoral condyle (RAPPD).ResultsThe posterior–anterior direction of femoral AM tunnel, the proximal–distal direction of femoral PL tunnel, and the posterior–anterior direction of femoral PL tunnel were statistically significantly different from the reference data. In correlation analyses between BB or HU and other variables, the AM tibial tunnel and RBL showed a moderate negative correlation. The cutoff point for tunnel breakage was an RLB of 1.14, meaning that the possibility of bone bridge breakage would increases for RBL values of >1.14.ConclusionsIt seems that conventional transtibial drilling technique used during double bundle ACL reconstruction does not reproduce correct tunnel locations compared with reference data. This problem was found to be related to the bony geometry of the medial wall of the lateral femoral condyle or the bone bridge between the two tibial tunnels. Our results indicate that RBL should be determined by pre-operative CT or plain lateral radiography, and that transtibial single bundle reconstruction or double bundle reconstruction using other methods should be attempted when the RBL exceeds 1.14.

Incidence and Risk Factors of Subsequent Hip Fractures in Korea: Multicenter Study

This study analyzes the incidence of subsequent hip fractures and its risk factors in the northwestern region of Korea. We analyzed hip fracture patients who visited any of the 5 teaching hospitals in the Bucheon and Incheon area from January 2000 to December 2010. Medical records were reviewed and presence of subsequent hip fractures, alcohol history, marital status, live in solitude, dementia, dizziness, American society of anesthesiologists score, osteoporosis treatment after fracture, body mass index (BMI) and initial bone mineral density were analyzed. The average follow-up period was 12 months (range 1-130 months). A total of 2,546 patients (women 1,770, men 776) who had experienced hip fractures were included. Of these, subsequent hip fractures were found in 233 patients (9.2%) (women 187, men 46). Mean age at the time of the first fracture was 79.2 yr old (range 50-100 yr). The average interval between the first fracture and the subsequent hip fractures was 30.2 months (range 4 days-154 months). In this large-scale, retrospective, multicenter study, overall incidence of subsequent hip fractures is 9.2%. Independent risk factors of subsequent fracture are women, BMI<22 kg/m2, and being unmarried.