Eivind Inderhaug1, Sveinung Raknes2, Thomas Østvold2, Eirik Solheim3,2, Torbjørn Strand3. 1. Surgical Department, Haraldsplass Deaconess Hospital, PB 6165, 5152, Bergen, Norway. eivind.inderhaug@gmail.com. 2. Department of Clinical Medicine, Faculty of Medicine and Dentistry, University of Bergen, Bergen, Norway. 3. Surgical Department, Haraldsplass Deaconess Hospital, PB 6165, 5152, Bergen, Norway.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To map knee morphology radiographically in a population with a torn ACL and to investigate whether anatomic factors could be related to outcomes after ACL reconstruction at mid- to long-term follow-up. Further, we wanted to assess tibial tunnel placement after using the 70-degree "anti-impingement" tibial tunnel guide and investigate any relation between tunnel placement and revision surgery. METHODS: Patients undergoing ACL reconstruction involving the 70-degree tibial guide from 2003 to 2008 were included. Two independent investigators analysed pre- and post-operative radiographs. Demographic data and information on revision surgery were collected from an internal database. Anatomic factors and post-operative tibial tunnel placements were investigated as predictors of revision. RESULTS: Three-hundred and seventy-seven patients were included in the study. A large anatomic variation with significant differences between men and women was seen. None of the anatomic factors could be related to a significant increase in revision rate. Patients with a posterior tibial tunnel placement, defined as 50 % or more posterior on the Amis and Jakob line, did, however, have a higher risk of revision surgery compared to patients with an anterior tunnel placement (P = 0.03). CONCLUSION: Use of the 70-degree tibial guide did result in a high incidence (47 %) of posterior tibial tunnel placements associated with an increased rate of revision surgery. The current study was, however, not able to identify any anatomic variation that could be related to a higher risk of revision surgery. Avoiding graft impingement from the femoral roof in anterior tibial tunnel placements is important, but the insight that overly posterior tunnel placement can lead to inferior outcome should also be kept in mind when performing ACL surgery. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: IV.
PURPOSE: To map knee morphology radiographically in a population with a torn ACL and to investigate whether anatomic factors could be related to outcomes after ACL reconstruction at mid- to long-term follow-up. Further, we wanted to assess tibial tunnel placement after using the 70-degree "anti-impingement" tibial tunnel guide and investigate any relation between tunnel placement and revision surgery. METHODS:Patients undergoing ACL reconstruction involving the 70-degree tibial guide from 2003 to 2008 were included. Two independent investigators analysed pre- and post-operative radiographs. Demographic data and information on revision surgery were collected from an internal database. Anatomic factors and post-operative tibial tunnel placements were investigated as predictors of revision. RESULTS: Three-hundred and seventy-seven patients were included in the study. A large anatomic variation with significant differences between men and women was seen. None of the anatomic factors could be related to a significant increase in revision rate. Patients with a posterior tibial tunnel placement, defined as 50 % or more posterior on the Amis and Jakob line, did, however, have a higher risk of revision surgery compared to patients with an anterior tunnel placement (P = 0.03). CONCLUSION: Use of the 70-degree tibial guide did result in a high incidence (47 %) of posterior tibial tunnel placements associated with an increased rate of revision surgery. The current study was, however, not able to identify any anatomic variation that could be related to a higher risk of revision surgery. Avoiding graft impingement from the femoral roof in anterior tibial tunnel placements is important, but the insight that overly posterior tunnel placement can lead to inferior outcome should also be kept in mind when performing ACL surgery. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: IV.
Authors: Pierluigi Cuomo; Andrew Edwards; Francesco Giron; Anthony M J Bull; Andrew A Amis; Paolo Aglietti Journal: Arthroscopy Date: 2006-01 Impact factor: 4.772
Authors: H Van der Bracht; L Verhelst; B Stuyts; B Page; J Bellemans; P Verdonk Journal: Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc Date: 2013-01-31 Impact factor: 4.342
Authors: Carl Haasper; Sebastian Kopf; Stephan Lorenz; Kellie K Middleton; Scott Tashman; Freddie H Fu Journal: Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc Date: 2013-11-17 Impact factor: 4.342
Authors: Willem A Kernkamp; Nathan H Varady; Jing-Sheng Li; Tsung-Yuan Tsai; Peter D Asnis; Ewoud R A van Arkel; Rob G H H Nelissen; Thomas J Gill; Samuel K Van de Velde; Guoan Li Journal: Arthroscopy Date: 2018-03-01 Impact factor: 4.772