Literature DB >> 35023873

What Is the Maximum Tibial Tunnel Angle for Transtibial PCL Reconstruction? A Comparison Based on Virtual Radiographs, CT Images, and 3D Knee Models.

Yuanjun Teng1,2, Lijun Da3, Gengxin Jia2, Jie Hu4, Zhongcheng Liu2, Shifeng Zhang1,2, Hua Han1,2, Yayi Xia1,2.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: To minimize the killer turn caused by the sharp margin of the tibial tunnel exit in transtibial PCL reconstruction, surgeons tend to maximize the angle of the tibial tunnel in relation to the tibial plateau. However, to date, no consensus has been reached regarding the maximum angle for the PCL tibial tunnel. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: In this study we sought (1) to determine the maximum tibial tunnel angle for the anteromedial and anterolateral approaches in transtibial PCL reconstruction; (2) to compare the differences in the maximum angle based on three measurement methods: virtual radiographs, CT images, and three-dimensional (3D) knee models; and (3) to conduct a correlation analysis to determine whether patient anthropomorphic factors (age, sex, height, and BMI) are associated with the maximum tibial tunnel angle.
METHODS: Between January 2018 and December 2020, 625 patients who underwent CT scanning for knee injuries were retrospectively reviewed in our institution. Inclusion criteria were patients 18 to 60 years of age with a Kellgren-Lawrence grade of knee osteoarthritis less than 1 and CT images that clearly showed the PCL tibial attachment. Exclusion criteria were patients with a history of tibial plateau fracture, PCL injuries, tumor, and deformity around the knee. Finally, 104 patients (43 males and 61 females, median age: 38 [range 24 to 56] years, height: 165 ± 9 cm, median BMI: 23 kg/cm2 [range 17 to 31]) were included for analysis. CT data were used to create virtual 3D knee models, and virtual true lateral knee radiographs were obtained by rotating the 3D knee models. Virtual 3D knee models were used as an in vitro standard method to assess the true maximum tibial tunnel angle of anteromedial and anterolateral approaches in transtibial PCL reconstruction. The tibial tunnel's entry was placed 1.5 cm anteromedial and anterolateral to the tibial tubercle for the two approaches. To obtain the maximum angle, a 10-mm- diameter tibial tunnel was simulated by making the tibial tunnel near the posterior tibial cortex. The maximum tibial tunnel angle, tibial tunnel lengths, and perpendicular distances of the tunnel's entry point to the tibial plateau were measured on virtual radiographs, CT images, and virtual 3D knee models. One-way ANOVA was used to compare the differences in the maximum angle among groups, and correlation analysis was performed to identify the relationship of the maximum angle and anthropomorphic factors (age, sex, height, and BMI).
RESULTS: The maximum angle of the PCL tibial tunnel relative to the tibial plateau was greater in the anteromedial group than the anterolateral group (58° ± 8° versus 50° ± 8°, mean difference 8° [95% CI 6° to 10°]; p < 0.001). The maximum angle of the PCL tibial tunnel was greater in the virtual radiograph group than the CT image (68° ± 6° versus 49° ± 5°, mean difference 19° [95% CI 17° to 21°]; p < 0.001), the anteromedial approach (68° ± 6° versus 58° ± 8°, mean difference 10° [95% CI 8° to 12°]; p < 0.001), and the anterolateral approach (68° ± 6° versus 50° ± 8°, mean difference 18° [95% CI 16° to 20°]; p < 0.001), but no difference was found between the CT image and the anterolateral groups (49° ± 5° versus 50° ± 8°, mean difference -1° [95% CI -4° to 1°]; p = 0.79). We found no patient anthropomorphic characteristics (age, sex, height, and BMI) that were associated with the maximum angle.
CONCLUSION: Surgeons should note that the mean maximum angle of the tibial tunnel relative to the tibial plateau was greater in the anteromedial than anterolateral approach in PCL reconstruction, and the maximum angle might be overestimated on virtual radiographs and underestimated on CT images. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: To perform PCL reconstruction more safely, the findings of this study suggest that the PCL drill system should be set differently for the anteromedial and anterolateral approaches, and the maximum angle measured by intraoperative fluoroscopy should be reduced 10° for the anteromedial approach and 18° for the anterolateral approach. Future clinical or cadaveric studies are needed to validate our findings.
Copyright © 2022 by the Association of Bone and Joint Surgeons.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2022        PMID: 35023873      PMCID: PMC9029965          DOI: 10.1097/CORR.0000000000002111

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res        ISSN: 0009-921X            Impact factor:   4.176


  34 in total

1.  Posterior cruciate ligament tibial insertion anatomy and implications for tibial tunnel placement.

Authors:  Yong Seuk Lee; Ho Jong Ra; Jin Hwan Ahn; Jeong Ku Ha; Jin Goo Kim
Journal:  Arthroscopy       Date:  2010-10-16       Impact factor: 4.772

2.  An analysis of the posterior cruciate ligament isometric position using an in vivo 3-dimensional computed tomography-based knee joint model.

Authors:  Woon-Seob Jeong; Yon-Sik Yoo; Do-Young Kim; Nagraj S Shetty; Patrick Smolinski; Kartik Logishetty; Anil Ranawat
Journal:  Arthroscopy       Date:  2010-05-14       Impact factor: 4.772

3.  Evaluation of the permissible maximum angle of the tibial tunnel in transtibial anatomic posterior cruciate ligament reconstruction by computed tomography.

Authors:  Yuanjun Teng; Xiaohui Zhang; Chongwen Ma; Haosen Wu; Rui Li; Hong Wang; Hua Han; Yayi Xia
Journal:  Arch Orthop Trauma Surg       Date:  2018-12-08       Impact factor: 3.067

4.  Application of a true lateral virtual radiograph from 3D-CT to identify the femoral reference point of the medial patellofemoral ligament.

Authors:  Masakazu Ishikawa; Charles Hoo; Minoru Ishifuro; Goki Kamei; Takenori Omoto; Toshiya Kano; Kyohei Nakata; Akinori Nekomoto; Atsuo Nakamae; Nobuo Adachi
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2021-01-18       Impact factor: 4.342

Review 5.  No Clinically Important Difference in Knee Scores or Instability Between Transtibial and Inlay Techniques for PCL Reconstruction: A Systematic Review.

Authors:  Young-Soo Shin; Hyun-Jung Kim; Dae-Hee Lee
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2016-11-28       Impact factor: 4.176

6.  Posterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction With Transtibial or Tibial Inlay Techniques: A Meta-analysis of Biomechanical and Clinical Outcomes.

Authors:  Dong-Yeong Lee; Dong-Hee Kim; Hyun-Jung Kim; Hyeong-Sik Ahn; Tae-Ho Lee; Sun-Chul Hwang
Journal:  Am J Sports Med       Date:  2018-01-12       Impact factor: 6.202

Review 7.  Management of Posterior Cruciate Ligament Injuries: An Evidence-Based Review.

Authors:  Asheesh Bedi; Volker Musahl; James B Cowan
Journal:  J Am Acad Orthop Surg       Date:  2016-05       Impact factor: 3.020

8.  An anatomical and biomechanical comparison of anteromedial and anterolateral approaches for tibial tunnel of posterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: evaluation of the widening effect of the anterolateral approach.

Authors:  Jin Hwan Ahn; Ji Hoon Bae; Yong Seuk Lee; Kuiwon Choi; Tae Soo Bae; Joon Ho Wang
Journal:  Am J Sports Med       Date:  2009-05-26       Impact factor: 6.202

9.  The posterior cruciate ligament: a study on its bony and soft tissue anatomy using novel 3D CT technology.

Authors:  Tom Van Hoof; Michiel Cromheecke; Thomas Tampere; Katharina D'herde; Jan Victor; Peter C M Verdonk
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2012-12-27       Impact factor: 4.342

10.  The mechanism of "killer turn" causing residual laxity after transtibial posterior cruciate ligament reconstruction.

Authors:  Yue Li; Jin Zhang; Guanyang Song; Xu Li; Hua Feng
Journal:  Asia Pac J Sports Med Arthrosc Rehabil Technol       Date:  2016-01-21
View more
  3 in total

1.  CORR Insights®: What Is the Maximum Tibial Tunnel Angle for Transtibial PCL Reconstruction? A Comparison Based on Virtual Radiographs, CT Images, and 3D Knee Models.

Authors:  Brian B Gilmer
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2022-03-02       Impact factor: 4.176

2.  The Permissive Safe Angle of the Tibial Tunnel in Transtibial Posterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: A Three-Dimensional Simulation Study.

Authors:  Yuanjun Teng; Gengxin Jia; Lijun Da; Bo Peng; Zhongcheng Liu; Hua Han; Meng Wu; Yayi Xia
Journal:  Orthop Surg       Date:  2022-04-27       Impact factor: 2.279

3.  3D Killer Turn Angle in Transtibial Posterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction Is Determined by the Graft Turning Angle both in the Sagittal and Coronal Planes.

Authors:  Gengxin Jia; Yuchen Tang; Zhongcheng Liu; Bo Peng; Lijun Da; Jun Yang; Xiaolong Liu; Ming Ma; Hua Han; Meng Wu; Bin Geng; Yayi Xia; Yuanjun Teng
Journal:  Orthop Surg       Date:  2022-08-03       Impact factor: 2.279

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.