Literature DB >> 16365374

Where should the femoral tunnel of a posterior cruciate ligament reconstruction be placed to best restore anteroposterior laxity and ligament forces?

Keith L Markolf1, Brian T Feeley, Steven R Jackson, David R McAllister.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Objective results of posterior cruciate ligament reconstruction are often less than satisfactory, with many patients exhibiting excessive posterior laxity. HYPOTHESIS: Changes in the position of the femoral tunnel within the posterior cruciate ligament's femoral footprint will significantly affect anteroposterior laxities and graft forces. STUDY
DESIGN: Controlled laboratory study.
METHODS: The posterior cruciate ligament's femoral origin was mechanically isolated in 13 fresh-frozen knee specimens, and the bone cap containing the ligament's insertion was attached to a load cell that recorded resultant force during tibial loading tests. Anteroposterior laxity (at +/- 200 N applied force) was also measured. Cast acrylic replicas of the bone cap were fabricated, with tunnels placed in anterolateral, central, and posteromedial regions of the footprint. A graft reconstruction was tested in each tunnel.
RESULTS: Mean laxities with the anterolateral tunnel were +0.9 mm to +1.7 mm greater than normal between 0 degrees and 45 degrees of flexion. Mean laxities with the posteromedial tunnel were -2.4 mm to -3.7 mm less than normal between 10 degrees and 45 degrees of flexion. Mean laxities with the central tunnel were not significantly different from intact knee values, except at 0 degrees (0.9 mm greater). Mean graft forces with the anterolateral tunnel were normal for most modes of loading, whereas there were significant increases in graft forces with the posteromedial and central tunnels.
CONCLUSION: The anterolateral tunnel reproduced normal posterior cruciate ligament force profiles but produced a knee that was more lax than normal between 0 degrees and 45 degrees of flexion. The central tunnel best matched intact knee laxities, but graft forces were higher than posterior cruciate ligament forces between 0 degrees and 45 degrees of flexion. The posteromedial tunnel overconstrained anteroposterior laxity approximately 2 to 4 mm between 0 degrees and 45 degrees of flexion and generated higher graft forces in the same flexion range. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: This study suggests that a posteromedial tunnel should not be used for single-bundle posterior cruciate ligament reconstruction.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2005        PMID: 16365374     DOI: 10.1177/0363546505281809

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am J Sports Med        ISSN: 0363-5465            Impact factor:   6.202


  14 in total

1.  The predictive effect of anatomic femoral and tibial graft tunnel placement in posterior cruciate ligament reconstruction on functional and radiological outcome.

Authors:  Michael Osti; Doris Hierzer; Alessa Krawinkel; Thomas Hoffelner; Karl Peter Benedetto
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2014-10-18       Impact factor: 3.075

2.  Skeletal imaging following reconstruction of the posterior cruciate ligament: in vivo comparison of fluoroscopy, radiography, and computed tomography.

Authors:  Michael Osti; Alessa Krawinkel; Karl Peter Benedetto
Journal:  Skeletal Radiol       Date:  2014-08-21       Impact factor: 2.199

Review 3.  Posterior Cruciate Ligament: Current Concepts Review.

Authors:  Santiago Pache; Zachary S Aman; Mitchell Kennedy; Gilberto Yoshinobu Nakama; Gilbert Moatshe; Connor Ziegler; Robert F LaPrade
Journal:  Arch Bone Jt Surg       Date:  2018-01

4.  Location of the femoral tunnel aperture during single-bundle posterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: outside-in versus inside-out techniques.

Authors:  Jun-Ho Kim; Hoon-Young Kim; Dae-Hee Lee
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2018-04-26       Impact factor: 3.075

5.  Graft tension of the posterior cruciate ligament using a finite element model.

Authors:  Young-Jin Seo; Si Young Song; In Sung Kim; Myeong Jae Seo; Yoon Sang Kim; Yon-Sik Yoo
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2013-07-14       Impact factor: 4.342

6.  Clinical outcomes of rectangular tunnel technique in posterior cruciate ligament reconstruction were comparable to the results of conventional round tunnel technique.

Authors:  Seong Hwan Kim; Woo-Sung Kim; Boo-Seop Kim; Hyun-Soo Ok; Jong-Heon Kim; Jeuk Lee; Young-Bok Jung
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2021-01-03       Impact factor: 4.342

7.  Anatomic is better than isometric posterior cruciate ligament tunnel placement based upon in vivo simulation.

Authors:  Willem A Kernkamp; Axel J T Jens; Nathan H Varady; Ewoud R A van Arkel; Rob G H H Nelissen; Peter D Asnis; Robert F LaPrade; Samuel K Van de Velde; Guoan Li
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2018-10-26       Impact factor: 4.342

Review 8.  [The killer turn in the posterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: mechanism and improvement].

Authors:  Yipeng Lin; Wufeng Cai; Xihao Huang; Jian Li; Qi Li
Journal:  Zhongguo Xiu Fu Chong Jian Wai Ke Za Zhi       Date:  2020-06-15

9.  Comparable Clinical and Radiologic Outcomes Between an Anatomic Tunnel and a Low Tibial Tunnel in Remnant-Preserving Posterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction.

Authors:  Kyoung Ho Yoon; Jung-Suk Kim; Jae-Young Park; Soo Yeon Park; Raymond Yeak Dieu Kiat; Sang-Gyun Kim
Journal:  Orthop J Sports Med       Date:  2021-02-23

10.  Multiple Looping Technique for Tibial Fixation in Posterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction of the Knee.

Authors:  Jung Ho Noh; Kyoung Ho Yoon; Sang Jun Song; Young Hak Roh; Jae Woo Lee
Journal:  Arthrosc Tech       Date:  2015-01-12
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.