Willem A Kernkamp1,2,3, Axel J T Jens1,4, Nathan H Varady1,2, Ewoud R A van Arkel4, Rob G H H Nelissen3, Peter D Asnis2, Robert F LaPrade5, Samuel K Van de Velde6, Guoan Li7. 1. Bioengineering Laboratory, Newton-Wellesley Hospital, Newton, MA, 02462, USA. 2. Sports Medicine Center, Massachusetts General Hospital/Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA. 3. Orthopedic Surgery, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands. 4. Focus Clinic Orthopedic Surgery, Haaglanden Medical Center, The Hague, The Netherlands. 5. The Steadman Clinic, Vail, CO, USA. 6. Division of Pediatric Orthopaedic Surgery, The Hospital for Sick Children, Toronto, ON, Canada. 7. Bioengineering Laboratory, Newton-Wellesley Hospital, Newton, MA, 02462, USA. gli1@partners.org.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To elucidate the effects of various tibial and femoral attachment locations on the theoretical length changes and isometry of PCL grafts in healthy knees during in vivo weightbearing motion. METHODS: The intact knees of 14 patients were imaged using a combined magnetic resonance and dual fluoroscopic imaging technique while the patient performed a quasi-static lunge (0°-120° of flexion). The theoretical end-to-end distances of the 3-dimensional wrapping paths between 165 femoral attachments, including the anatomic anterolateral bundle (ALB), central attachment and posteromedial bundle (PMB) of the PCL, connected to an anterolateral, central, and posteromedial tibial attachment were simulated and measured. A descriptive heatmap was created to demonstrate the length changes on the medial condyle and formal comparisons were made between the length changes of the anatomic PCL and most isometric grafts. RESULTS: The most isometric graft, with approximately 3% length change between 0° and 120° of flexion, was located proximal to the anatomic femoral PCL attachments. Grafts with femoral attachments proximal to the isometric zone decreased in length with increasing flexion angles, whereas grafts with more distal attachments increased in length with increasing flexion angles. The ALB and central single-bundle graft demonstrated a significant elongation from 0° to 120° of flexion (p < 0.001). The PMB decreased in length between 0° and 60° of flexion after which the bundle increased in length to its maximum length at 120° (p < 0.001). No significant differences in length changes were found between either the ALB or PMB and the central graft, and between the ALB and PMB at flexion angles ≥ 60° (n.s.). CONCLUSIONS: The most isometric attachment was proximal to the anatomic PCL footprint and resulted in non-physiological length changes. Moving the femoral attachment locations of the PCL significantly affected length change patterns, whereas moving the tibia locations did not. The importance of anatomically positioned (i.e., distal to the isometric area) femoral PCL reconstruction locations to replicate physiological length changes is highlighted. These data can be used to optimize tunnel positioning in either single- or double-bundle and primary or revision PCL reconstruction cases. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: IV.
PURPOSE: To elucidate the effects of various tibial and femoral attachment locations on the theoretical length changes and isometry of PCL grafts in healthy knees during in vivo weightbearing motion. METHODS: The intact knees of 14 patients were imaged using a combined magnetic resonance and dual fluoroscopic imaging technique while the patient performed a quasi-static lunge (0°-120° of flexion). The theoretical end-to-end distances of the 3-dimensional wrapping paths between 165 femoral attachments, including the anatomic anterolateral bundle (ALB), central attachment and posteromedial bundle (PMB) of the PCL, connected to an anterolateral, central, and posteromedial tibial attachment were simulated and measured. A descriptive heatmap was created to demonstrate the length changes on the medial condyle and formal comparisons were made between the length changes of the anatomic PCL and most isometric grafts. RESULTS: The most isometric graft, with approximately 3% length change between 0° and 120° of flexion, was located proximal to the anatomic femoral PCL attachments. Grafts with femoral attachments proximal to the isometric zone decreased in length with increasing flexion angles, whereas grafts with more distal attachments increased in length with increasing flexion angles. The ALB and central single-bundle graft demonstrated a significant elongation from 0° to 120° of flexion (p < 0.001). The PMB decreased in length between 0° and 60° of flexion after which the bundle increased in length to its maximum length at 120° (p < 0.001). No significant differences in length changes were found between either the ALB or PMB and the central graft, and between the ALB and PMB at flexion angles ≥ 60° (n.s.). CONCLUSIONS: The most isometric attachment was proximal to the anatomic PCL footprint and resulted in non-physiological length changes. Moving the femoral attachment locations of the PCL significantly affected length change patterns, whereas moving the tibia locations did not. The importance of anatomically positioned (i.e., distal to the isometric area) femoral PCL reconstruction locations to replicate physiological length changes is highlighted. These data can be used to optimize tunnel positioning in either single- or double-bundle and primary or revision PCL reconstruction cases. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: IV.
Authors: Keith L Markolf; David R McAllister; Charles R Young; Justin McWilliams; Daniel A Oakes Journal: J Orthop Res Date: 2003-01 Impact factor: 3.494
Authors: Christopher S Ahmad; Zohara A Cohen; William N Levine; Thomas R Gardner; Gerard A Ateshian; Van C Mow Journal: Am J Sports Med Date: 2003 Mar-Apr Impact factor: 6.202