PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to compare the tibiofemoral contact area and pressure after single-bundle (SB) and double-bundle (DB) anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction by use of 2 femoral and 2 tibial tunnels in intact cadaveric knees. METHODS: Tibiofemoral contact area and mean and maximum pressures were measured by pressure-sensitive film (Fujifilm, Valhalla, NY) inserted between the tibia and femur. The knee was subjected to a 1,000-N axial load by use of a uniaxial testing machine at 0 degrees , 15 degrees , 30 degrees , and 45 degrees of flexion. Three conditions were evaluated: (1) intact ACL, (2) SB ACL reconstruction (n = 10 knees), and (3) DB ACL reconstruction (n = 9 knees). RESULTS: When compared with the intact knee, DB ACL reconstruction showed no significant difference in tibiofemoral contact area and mean and maximum pressures. SB ACL reconstruction had a significantly smaller contact area on the lateral and medial tibiofemoral joints at 30 degrees and 15 degrees of flexion. SB ACL reconstruction also had significantly higher mean pressures at 15 degrees of flexion on the medial tibiofemoral joint and at 0 degrees and 15 degrees of flexion on the lateral tibiofemoral joint, as well as significantly higher maximum pressures at 15 degrees of flexion on the lateral tibiofemoral joint. CONCLUSIONS: SB ACL reconstruction resulted in a significantly smaller tibiofemoral contact area and higher pressures. DB ACL more closely restores the normal contact area and pressure mainly at low flexion angles. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Our findings suggest that the changes in the contact area and pressures after SB ACL reconstruction may be one of the causes of osteoarthritis on long-term follow-up. DB ACL reconstruction may reduce the incidence of osteoarthritis by closely restoring contact area and pressure.
PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to compare the tibiofemoral contact area and pressure after single-bundle (SB) and double-bundle (DB) anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction by use of 2 femoral and 2 tibial tunnels in intact cadaveric knees. METHODS: Tibiofemoral contact area and mean and maximum pressures were measured by pressure-sensitive film (Fujifilm, Valhalla, NY) inserted between the tibia and femur. The knee was subjected to a 1,000-N axial load by use of a uniaxial testing machine at 0 degrees , 15 degrees , 30 degrees , and 45 degrees of flexion. Three conditions were evaluated: (1) intact ACL, (2) SB ACL reconstruction (n = 10 knees), and (3) DB ACL reconstruction (n = 9 knees). RESULTS: When compared with the intact knee, DB ACL reconstruction showed no significant difference in tibiofemoral contact area and mean and maximum pressures. SB ACL reconstruction had a significantly smaller contact area on the lateral and medial tibiofemoral joints at 30 degrees and 15 degrees of flexion. SB ACL reconstruction also had significantly higher mean pressures at 15 degrees of flexion on the medial tibiofemoral joint and at 0 degrees and 15 degrees of flexion on the lateral tibiofemoral joint, as well as significantly higher maximum pressures at 15 degrees of flexion on the lateral tibiofemoral joint. CONCLUSIONS: SB ACL reconstruction resulted in a significantly smaller tibiofemoral contact area and higher pressures. DB ACL more closely restores the normal contact area and pressure mainly at low flexion angles. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Our findings suggest that the changes in the contact area and pressures after SB ACL reconstruction may be one of the causes of osteoarthritis on long-term follow-up. DB ACL reconstruction may reduce the incidence of osteoarthritis by closely restoring contact area and pressure.
Authors: Ata A Rahnemai-Azar; Jan-Hendrik Naendrup; Ashish Soni; Adam Olsen; Jason Zlotnicki; Volker Musahl Journal: Curr Rev Musculoskelet Med Date: 2016-06
Authors: Carl Imhauser; Craig Mauro; Daniel Choi; Eric Rosenberg; Stephen Mathew; Joseph Nguyen; Yan Ma; Thomas Wickiewicz Journal: Am J Sports Med Date: 2013-03-07 Impact factor: 6.202