Literature DB >> 33927815

Does Viewing the ACL Femoral Footprint End on Using a High Medial Portal Produce Better Tunnel Placement as Compared to Viewing it from a Lateral Portal while Drilling: A 3D CT-based Pilot Study.

Vikram A Mhaskar1, Ajay K Singh1, Pankaj Soni1, Jitendra Maheshwari1.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Anatomical placement of an ACL graft is critical to the clinical outcome of an ACL reconstruction. The purpose of the study was to compare the conventional technique of drilling a femoral tunnel from a medial portal while viewing it from a lateral portal versus viewing it from a high anteromedial portal and drilling it from a low medial portal. We hypothesized that the high anteromedial portal possibly provides an end-on view of the tunnel and would lead to a more favourable tunnel position.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Sixty patients underwent arthroscopic single-bundle ACL reconstruction with a soft tissue graft. All patients had the same surgeon and same surgical technique (except viewing portal). Each patient underwent a 3D-CT 1-week post-op. We classified the patients into two groups (technique A and B) of 30 each. Postoperative tunnel position in each patient was visualized on CT scan with 3D reconstruction by the quadrant method described by Bernard et al. The distance of the centre of the femoral tunnel from the superior and posterior border of the Bernard frame was obtained in each patient of the two groups and mean value in each group was obtained and compared by Student 't' test at 5% level of significance. The position of the femoral tunnels was also studied in reference to the lateral intercondylar ridge and classified into type I (well placed), type II (moderately malpositioned) and type III (grossly malpositioned).
RESULTS: The mean distances in technique A from the posterior and superior border of the lateral femoral condyle was 35.8 ± 8.2 and 35.2 ± 6.7, and in technique B was 38.1 ± 8.6 and 35.8 ± 9.4. The two groups did not differ significantly (P > 0.05) in femoral tunnel position as visualized on 3D-CT scan postoperatively. 53.3% patients had well-placed tunnels (type I) overall with 56.67% of technique A and 50% of technique B in this group. None of the tunnels were grossly malpositioned.
CONCLUSIONS: The absence of any statistically significant difference between the groups suggests that a high anterolateral portal close to the patellar tendon gives an almost complete view of the lateral aspect of the notch, if not end on. Both techniques produced a majority of well placed (type I) tunnels. © Indian Orthopaedics Association 2020.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Femoral tunnel; Notch; Patellar tendon; Portal; Quadrant method

Year:  2020        PMID: 33927815      PMCID: PMC8046892          DOI: 10.1007/s43465-020-00179-3

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Indian J Orthop        ISSN: 0019-5413            Impact factor:   1.251


  13 in total

1.  Improperly placed anterior cruciate ligament grafts: correlation between radiological parameters and clinical results.

Authors:  C Sommer; N F Friederich; W Müller
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2000       Impact factor: 4.342

2.  A CT-based classification of prior ACL femoral tunnel location for planning revision ACL surgery.

Authors:  Robert A Magnussen; Pedro Debieux; Biju Benjamin; Sébastien Lustig; Guillaume Demey; Elvire Servien; Philippe Neyret
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2011-12-08       Impact factor: 4.342

Review 3.  Anterior cruciate ligament femoral footprint anatomy: systematic review of the 21st century literature.

Authors:  Jason W Piefer; T Ryan Pflugner; Michael D Hwang; James H Lubowitz
Journal:  Arthroscopy       Date:  2012-02-01       Impact factor: 4.772

Review 4.  "Anatomic" anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a systematic review of surgical techniques and reporting of surgical data.

Authors:  Carola F van Eck; Verena M Schreiber; Hector A Mejia; Kristian Samuelsson; C Niek van Dijk; Jon Karlsson; Freddie H Fu
Journal:  Arthroscopy       Date:  2010-09       Impact factor: 4.772

Review 5.  Anatomy of the anterior cruciate ligament with regard to its two bundles.

Authors:  Wolf Petersen; Thore Zantop
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2007-01       Impact factor: 4.176

6.  Three-portal technique for anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: use of a central medial portal.

Authors:  Steven B Cohen; Freddie H Fu
Journal:  Arthroscopy       Date:  2007-01-18       Impact factor: 4.772

Review 7.  The "footprint" anterior cruciate ligament technique: an anatomic approach to anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction.

Authors:  Asheesh Bedi; David W Altchek
Journal:  Arthroscopy       Date:  2009-08-22       Impact factor: 4.772

8.  Revision anterior cruciate ligament surgery: experience from Pittsburgh.

Authors:  D L Johnson; T M Swenson; J J Irrgang; F H Fu; C D Harner
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  1996-04       Impact factor: 4.176

9.  Femoral insertion of the ACL. Radiographic quadrant method.

Authors:  M Bernard; P Hertel; H Hornung; T Cierpinski
Journal:  Am J Knee Surg       Date:  1997

Review 10.  A Systematic Review of Anterior Cruciate Ligament Femoral Footprint Location Evaluated by Quadrant Method for Single-Bundle and Double-Bundle Anatomic Reconstruction.

Authors:  Hu Xu; Chunli Zhang; Qiang Zhang; Tianshu Du; Ming Ding; Yingchun Wang; Sai-Chuen Fu; Chelsea Hopkins; Shu-Hang Yung
Journal:  Arthroscopy       Date:  2016-04-30       Impact factor: 4.772

View more
  2 in total

1.  How Important is the Tunnel Position in Outcomes Post-ACL Reconstruction: A 3D CT-Based Study.

Authors:  Vikram A Mhaskar; Yogesh Jain; Pankaj Soni; Rajendra Fiske; Jitendra Maheshwari
Journal:  Indian J Orthop       Date:  2021-08-15       Impact factor: 1.033

2.  Trends in Primary Anatomical Single-Bundle Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction Practice in Adult Patients Prevalent Among Arthroscopy Surgeons of Six Southern States of India.

Authors:  Vivek Pandey; Sandesh Madi; Chirag Thonse; Clement Joseph; David Rajan; Jacob Varughese; Jai Thilak; P S Jayaprasad; Kiran Acharya; Krishna Gopal Ramamurthy; Raghuveer Reddy; Rajkumar Amravathi; Sharath Rao; Sridhar Gangavarapu; Moparthi Srinivas; Sujit Jose; S R Sundararjan
Journal:  Indian J Orthop       Date:  2022-08-20       Impact factor: 1.033

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.