Hemanth R. Gadikota

The Relationship Between Femoral Tunnels Created by the Transtibial, Anteromedial Portal, and Outside-In Techniques and the Anterior Cruciate Ligament Footprint

Background: Tunnels created for reconstruction of a torn anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) are critical determinants of joint stability and clinical outcomes. There is limited objective evidence on the ability of transtibial (TT), anteromedial (AM) portal, and outside-in (OI) operative techniques in creating anatomic tunnels. Hypothesis: (1) Tibial tunnel–independent techniques can create tunnels more accurately at the anatomic ACL footprint center than the TT technique, and (2) femoral tunnel exit location of the OI and TT techniques on the lateral cortex will be significantly further away from the lateral epicondyle than the femoral tunnel exit location of the AM portal technique. Study Design: Controlled laboratory study. Methods: Eight cadaveric knee specimens with a mean age of 56 years were used in this study. A digitizing system was used to record points along the outlines of the ACL insertion area and apertures of tunnels created by the TT, AM portal, and OI techniques. The following parameters were measured from the digitized points: (1) amount of ACL, anteromedial bundle, and posterolateral bundle coverage by the tunnels; (2) relationship between the centers of the ACL and the tunnels; and (3) distance between the center of the femoral tunnel exit and the lateral epicondyle. All the recorded parameters were analyzed in 3-dimensional solid modeling software. Results: The percentage of ACL footprint coverage achieved by all 3 surgical techniques was not significantly different from one another. However, larger femoral posterolateral bundle coverage was observed in tunnels created by the AM portal and OI techniques than in the TT tunnel. In terms of anteromedial bundle coverage, no significant differences were observed between the 3 techniques. On average, 27.1% ± 17.4% of the TT tunnel was outside the ACL footprint. This was significantly larger compared with 13.6% ± 15.7% with the AM portal technique (P = .01) and 10.8% ± 10.8% in the OI technique (P = .01). Centers of femoral tunnels created by the TT, AM portal, and OI techniques were located at a distance of 3.0 ± 1.5 mm, 2.1 ± 0.9 mm, and 1.5 ± 1.2 mm, respectively, from the ACL footprint center. The femoral tunnel exit location of the AM portal technique on the lateral femoral cortex was closer to the lateral epicondyle than the femoral tunnel exit location of the OI and TT techniques. Conclusion: Findings of this study indicate that a larger posterolateral bundle coverage is achieved by the AM portal and OI techniques than by the TT technique. Centers of the tunnels created by the AM portal and OI techniques were closer to the native ACL footprint center than the center of the TT technique tunnel. The incidence of a posterior femoral tunnel exit relative to the lateral epicondyle is higher in the AM portal technique than in the OI and TT techniques. Clinical Relevance: For ACL reconstruction using soft tissue grafts, tibial tunnel–independent techniques can produce more anatomic tunnels than the TT technique.

Prospective Comparative Study of Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction Using the Double-Bundle and Single-Bundle Techniques

Background The intent of double-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction is to reproduce the normal anterior cruciate ligament anatomy and improve knee joint rotational stability. However, no consensus has been reached on the advantages of this technique over the single-bundle technique. Hypothesis We hypothesized that double-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction could provide better intraoperative stability and clinical outcome than single-bundle reconstruction. Type of study: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 2. Methods Forty patients with anterior cruciate ligament injury in one knee were recruited; 20 were allocated to a double-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction group and 20 to a single-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction group. Intraoperative stabilities at 30° of knee flexion were compared between the 2 groups using a navigation system. Clinical outcomes including Lysholm knee scores, Tegner activity scores, Lachman and pivot-shift test results, and radiographic stabilities were also compared between the 2 groups after a minimum of 2 years of follow-up. Results Intraoperative anterior and rotational stabilities after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction in the double-bundle group were significantly better than those in single-bundle group (P = .020 and P < .001, respectively). Nineteen patients (95%) in each group were available at a minimum 2-year follow-up. Clinical outcomes including Lysholm knee and Tegner activity scores were similar in the 2 groups at 2-year follow-up (P > .05). Furthermore, stability results of the Lachman and pivot-shift tests, and radiologic findings at 2-year follow-up failed to reveal any significant intergroup differences (P > .05). Conclusion Although double-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction produces better intraoperative stabilities than single-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction, the 2 modalities were found to be similar in terms of clinical outcomes and postoperative stabilities after a minimum of 2 years of follow-up.

Comparison of Single- and Double-Bundle Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstructions in Restoration of Knee Kinematics and Anterior Cruciate Ligament Forces

Background: Anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) deficiency alters 6 degrees of freedom knee kinematics, yet only anterior translation and internal rotation have been the primary measures in previous studies. Purpose: To compare the 6 degrees of freedom knee kinematics and the graft forces after single- and double-bundle ACL reconstructions under various external loading conditions. Study Design: Controlled laboratory study. Methods: Ten human cadaveric knees were tested with a robotic testing system under 4 conditions: intact, ACL deficient, single-bundle reconstructed with a quadrupled hamstring tendon graft, and double-bundle reconstructed with 2 looped hamstring tendon grafts. Knee kinematics and forces of the ACL or ACL graft in each knee were measured under 3 loading conditions: an anterior tibial load of 134 N, a simulated quadriceps muscle load of 400 N, and combined tibial torques (10 N·m valgus and 5 N·m internal tibial torques) at 0°, 15°, 30°, 60°, and 90° of knee flexion. Results: The double-bundle reconstruction restored the anterior and medial laxities closer to the intact knee than the single-bundle reconstruction. However, the internal rotation of the tibia under the simulated quadriceps muscle load was significantly decreased when compared with the intact knee after both reconstructions, more so after double-bundle reconstruction (P < .05). The entire graft force of the double-bundle reconstruction was more similar to that of the intact ACL than that of the single-bundle reconstruction. However, the posterolateral bundle graft in the double-bundle reconstructed knee was overloaded as compared with the intact posterolateral bundle. Conclusion: The double-bundle reconstruction can better restore the normal anterior-posterior and medial-lateral laxities than the single-bundle reconstruction can, but an overloading of the posterolateral bundle graft can occur in a double-bundle reconstructed knee. Clinical relevance: Both single-bundle and double-bundle techniques cannot restore the rotational laxities and the ACL force distributions of the intact knee.

In Situ Forces in the Anteromedial and Posterolateral Bundles of the Anterior Cruciate Ligament Under Simulated Functional Loading Conditions

Background The in situ forces of the anteromedial (AM) and posterolateral bundles (PL) of the anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) under simulated functional loads such as simulated muscle loads have not been reported. These data are instrumental for improvement of the anatomical double-bundle ACL reconstruction. Hypothesis The load-sharing patterns of the 2 bundles are complementary under simulated muscle loads. Study Design Descriptive laboratory study. Methods Eight cadaveric knees in this study were sequentially studied using a robotic testing system. Each knee was tested under 3 external loading conditions including (1) a 134-N anterior tibial load; (2) combined rotational loads of 10 N·m of valgus and 5 N·m internal tibial torques; and (3) a 400-N quadriceps muscle load with the knee at 0°, 15°, 30°, 60°, and 90° of flexion. The in situ forces of the 2 bundles of ACL were determined using the principle of superposition. Results Under the anterior tibial load, the PL bundle carried peak loads at full extension and concurrently had significantly lower force than the AM bundle throughout the range of flexion (P < .05). Under the combined rotational loads, the PL bundle contributed to carrying the load between 0° and 30°, although less than the AM bundle. Under simulated muscle loads, both bundles carried loads between 0° and 30°. There was no significant difference between the 2 bundle forces at all flexion angles (P > .05). Conclusion Under externally applied loads, in general, the AM bundle carried a greater portion of the load at all flexion angles, whereas the PL bundle only shared the load at low flexion angles. The bundles functioned in a complementary rather than a reciprocal manner to each other. Clinical Relevance The data appear to support the concept that both bundles function in a complementary manner. Thus, how to re-create the 2 bundle functions in an ACL reconstruction should be further investigated.

Morphology of the medial collateral ligament of the knee

BackgroundQuantitative knowledge on the anatomy of the medial collateral ligament (MCL) is important for treatment of MCL injury and for MCL release during total knee arthroplasty (TKA). The objective of this study was to quantitatively determine the morphology of the MCL of human knees.Methods10 cadaveric human knees were dissected to investigate the MCL anatomy. The specimens were fixed in full extension and this position was maintained during the dissection and morphometric measurements. The outlines of the insertion sites of the superficial MCL (sMCL) and deep MCL (dMCL) were digitized using a 3D digitizing system.ResultsThe insertion areas of the superficial MCL (sMCL) were 348.6 ± 42.8 mm2 and 79.7 ± 17.6 mm2 on the tibia and femur, respectively. The insertion areas of the deep MCL (dMCL) were 63.6 ± 13.4 mm2 and 71.9 ± 14.8 mm2 on the tibia and femur, respectively. The distances from the centroids of the tibial and femoral insertions of the sMCL to the tibial and femoral joint line were 62.4 ± 5.5 mm and 31.1 ± 4.6 mm, respectively. The distances from the centroids of dMCL in the tibial insertion and the femoral insertion to the tibial and femoral joint line were 6.5 ± 1.3 mm and 20.5 ± 4.2 mm, respectively. The distal portion of the dMCL (meniscotibial ligament - MTL) was approximately 1.7 times wider than the proximal portion of the dMCL (meniscofemoral ligament - MFL), whereas the MFL was approximately 3 times longer than the MTL.ConclusionsThe morphologic data on the MCL may provide useful information for improving treatments of MCL-related pathology and performing MCL release during TKA.

Biomechanical Comparison of Single-Tunnel—Double-Bundle and Single-Bundle Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstructions

Background Anatomic double-bundle reconstruction has been thought to better simulate the anterior cruciate ligament anatomy. It is, however, a technically challenging procedure, associated with longer operation time and higher cost. Hypothesis Double-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction using a single femoral and tibial tunnel can closely reproduce intact knee kinematics. Study Design Controlled laboratory study. Methods Eight fresh-frozen human cadaveric knee specimens were tested using a robotic testing system to investigate the kinematic response of the knee joint under an anterior tibial load (130 N), simulated quadriceps load (400 N), and combined torques (5 N·m valgus and 5 N·m internal tibial torques) at 0°, 15°, 30°, 60°, and 90° of flexion. Each knee was tested sequentially under 4 conditions: (1) anterior cruciate ligament intact, (2) anterior cruciate ligament deficient, (3) single-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction using quadrupled hamstring tendon, and (4) single-tunnel—double-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction using the same tunnels and quadrupled hamstring tendon graft as in the single-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Results Single-tunnel—double-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction more closely restored the intact knee kinematics than single-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction at low flexion angles (≤30°) under the anterior tibial load and simulated muscle load (P < .05). However, single-tunnel—double-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction overconstrained the knee joint at high flexion angles (≥60°) under the anterior tibial load and at 0° and 30° of flexion under combined torques. Conclusion This double-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction using a single tunnel can better restore anterior tibial translations to the intact level compared with single-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction at low flexion angles, but it overconstrained the knee joint at high flexion angles. Clinical Relevance This technique could be an alternative for both single-bundle and double-tunnel—double-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstructions to reproduce intact knee kinematics and native anterior cruciate ligament anatomy.

The Effect of Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction on Kinematics of the Knee With Combined Anterior Cruciate Ligament Injury and Subtotal Medial Meniscectomy: An In Vitro Robotic Investigation

PURPOSE The aims of this study were to determine: (1) the kinematic effect of subtotal medial meniscectomy on the anterior cruciate ligament (ACL)-deficient knee and (2) the effect of ACL reconstruction on kinematics of the knee with combined ACL deficiency and subtotal medial meniscectomy under anterior tibial and simulated quadriceps loads. METHODS Eight human cadaveric knees were sequentially tested using a robotic testing system under 4 conditions: intact, ACL deficiency, ACL deficiency with subtotal medial meniscectomy, and single-bundle ACL reconstruction using a bone-patellar tendon-bone graft. Knee kinematics were measured at 0 degrees, 15 degrees, 30 degrees, 60 degrees, and 90 degrees of flexion under an anterior tibial load of 130 N and a quadriceps muscle load of 400 N. RESULTS Subtotal medial meniscectomy in the ACL-deficient knee significantly increased anterior and lateral tibial translations under the anterior tibial and quadriceps loads (P < .05). These kinematic changes were larger at high flexion (>or=60 degrees) than at low flexion angles. ACL reconstruction in knees with ACL deficiency and subtotal medial meniscectomy significantly reduced the increased anterior tibial translation, but could not restore anterior translation to the intact level with differences ranging from 2.6 mm at 0 degrees to 5.5 mm at 30 degrees of flexion. ACL reconstruction did not significantly affect the medial-lateral translation and internal-external tibial rotation in the presence of subtotal meniscectomy. CONCLUSIONS Subtotal medial meniscectomy in knees with ACL deficiency altered knee kinematics, especially at high flexion angles. ACL reconstruction significantly reduced the increased tibial translation in knees with combined ACL deficiency and subtotal medial meniscectomy, but could not restore the knee kinematics to the intact knee level. CLINICAL RELEVANCE This study suggests that meniscus is an important secondary stabilizer against anterior and lateral tibial translations and should be preserved in the setting of ACL reconstruction for restoration of optimal knee kinematics and function.

Anteroposterior Stability of the Knee during the Stance Phase of Gait after Anterior Cruciate Ligament Deficiency

Quadriceps avoidance and higher flexion strategies have been assumed as effects of ACL deficiency on knee joint function during gait. However, the effect of ACL deficiency on anteroposterior stability of the knee during gait is not well defined. In this study, 10 patients with unilateral acute ACL ruptures and the contralateral side intact performed gait on a treadmill. Flexion angles and anteroposterior translation of the ACL injured and the intact controlateral knees were measured at every 10% of the stance phase of the gait (from heel strike to toe-off) using a combined MRI and dual fluoroscopic imaging system (DFIS). The data indicated that during the stance phase of the gait, the ACL-deficient knees showed higher flexion angles compared to the intact contralateral side, consistent with the assumption of a higher flexion gait strategy. However, the data also revealed that the ACL-deficient knees had higher anterior tibial translation compared to the intact contralateral side during the stance phase of the gait. The higher flexion gait strategy was not shown to correlate to a reduction of the anterior tibial translation in ACL deficient knees. These data may provide indications for conservative treatment or surgical reconstruction of the ACL injured knees in restoration of the knee kinematics during daily walking activities.

Biomechanical Evaluation of Knee Joint Laxities and Graft Forces After Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction by Anteromedial Portal, Outside-In, and Transtibial Techniques

Background: Recently, anatomic anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction is emphasized to improve joint laxity and to potentially avert initiation of cartilage degeneration. There is a paucity of information on the efficacy of ACL reconstructions by currently practiced tunnel creation techniques in restoring normal joint laxity. Study Design: Controlled laboratory study. Hypothesis: Anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction by the anteromedial (AM) portal technique, outside-in (OI) technique, and modified transtibial (TT) technique can equally restore the normal knee joint laxity and ACL forces. Methods: Eight fresh-frozen human cadaveric knee specimens were tested using a robotic testing system under an anterior tibial load (134 N) at 0°, 30°, 60°, and 90° of flexion and combined torques (10-N·m valgus and 5-N·m internal tibial torques) at 0° and 30° of flexion. Knee joint kinematics, ACL, and ACL graft forces were measured in each knee specimen under 5 different conditions (ACL-intact knee, ACL-deficient knee, ACL-reconstructed knee by AM portal technique, ACL-reconstructed knee by OI technique, and ACL-reconstructed knee by TT technique). Results: Under anterior tibial load, no significant difference was observed between the 3 reconstructions in terms of restoring anterior tibial translation (P > .05). However, none of the 3 ACL reconstruction techniques could completely restore the normal anterior tibial translations (P < .05). Under combined tibial torques, both AM portal and OI techniques closely restored the normal knee anterior tibial translation (P > .05) at 0° of flexion but could not do so at 30° of flexion (P < .05). The ACL reconstruction by the TT technique was unable to restore normal anterior tibial translations at both 0° and 30° of flexion under combined tibial torques (P < .05). Forces experienced by the ACL grafts in the 3 reconstruction techniques were lower than those experienced by normal ACL under both the loading conditions. Conclusion: Anterior cruciate ligament reconstructions by AM portal, OI, and modified TT techniques are biomechanically comparable with each other in restoring normal knee joint laxity and in situ ACL forces. Clinical Relevance: Anterior cruciate ligament reconstructions by AM portal, OI, and modified TT techniques result in similar knee joint laxities. Technical perils and pearls should be carefully considered before choosing a tunnel creating technique.

A Clinical Comparison of Screw and Suture Fixation of Anterior Cruciate Ligament Tibial Avulsion Fractures

Background Screw and suture fixations are the most commonly used methods of fixation in treatment of anterior cruciate ligament tibial avulsion fractures. Even though a few biomechanical studies have compared the stability of the 2 fixation techniques, a clinical comparison has not yet been reported. Hypothesis The authors hypothesized that both fixations would be identical in all studied clinical outcome measures at a minimum 2-year follow-up. Study Design Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. Materials and Methods Thirty-three patients treated with either screw fixation (16 patients) or suture fixation (17 patients) within 1 month of the anterior cruciate ligament tibial avulsion fracture (type II or III) without associated ligamentous injury were included. All patients were evaluated at a minimum 2-year follow-up in terms of Lysholm knee scores and return to preinjury activities. Knee stability was compared based on the Lachman test and stress radiography. Results No significant differences were found between the 2 groups in terms of average Lysholm knee scores (91.7 in the screw group and 92.7 in the suture group, P = .413) at follow-up. All patients except 2 (1 in each group) returned to preinjury activity levels. However, flexion contractures (5° to 10°) were found in 3 patients in the screw group and 2 patients in the suture group without significant intergroup difference. Stabilities based on the Lachman test and instrumented stress radiography were also similar between the 2 groups at follow-up. However, 2 patients in the screw group and 1 in the suture group showed more than 5 mm laxity compared with the contralateral knee on stress radiographs. Conclusion Both the screw and suture fixation techniques for the anterior cruciate ligament tibial avulsion fracture produced relatively good results in terms of functional outcomes and stability without any significant differences. However, some patients in both groups showed residual laxity or flexion contractures.