MRI evaluation of the four tunnels of double-bundle ACL reconstruction

Abstract

Background

The double-bundle (DB) reconstruction of the anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) has gained popularity in recent years. The positioning of anteromedial (AM) and posterolateral (PL) tunnels is aimed at the anatomic femoral and tibial attachments of AM and PL bundles of the native ACL.

Purpose

To use magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) to evaluate the tunnel locations and tunnel findings in DB ACL reconstruction.

Material and Methods

Sixty-six patients with DB ACL reconstruction were evaluated with 1.5-T MRI 2 years postoperatively. Two musculoskeletal radiologists separately measured the locations and the diameters of the tunnels. Inter-observer agreements were estimated according to the method of Bland and Altman.

Results

In the femur, the mean AM tunnel location was 32% from the proximal condylar surface and 18% from the notch roof. The mean PL tunnel location was 42% and 43%, respectively. In the tibia, the mean AM tunnel location was 54% of the lateral-to-medial tibial width and 42% of the anterior-to-posterior tibial depth. The mean PL tunnel location was 54% and 56%, respectively. The mean tunnel enlargement was 3.8 mm (56%). Tunnel communication was seen in seven patients (11%) in the femur and in 19 patients (29%) in the tibia. Greater femoral AM tunnel distance from the proximal condylar surface was associated with more tunnel enlargement, and more posterior tibial PL tunnel location was associated with less tunnel enlargement.

Conclusion

The tunnel locations of DB ACL reconstruction can be evaluated with MRI. Tunnel location was associated with tunnel enlargement that in turn was associated with tunnel communication.

Keywords

MRI anterior cruciate ligament double-bundle reconstruction tunnel location tunnel enlargement

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Hussein

van Eck

Cretnick

. Prospective randomized clinical evaluation of conventional single-bundle, anatomic single-bundle, and anatomic double-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: 281 cases with 3- to 5-year follow-up. Am J Sports Med 2012; 40: 512–520.

Casagranda

Maxwell

Kavanagh

. Normal appearance and complications of double-bundle and selective-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstructions using optimal MRI techniques. Am J Roentgenol 2009; 192: 1407–1415.

Bencardino

Beltran

Feldman

. MR imaging of complications of anterior cruciate ligament graft reconstruction. Radiographics 2009; 29: 2115–2126.

Siebold

. Observations on bone tunnel enlargement after double-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Arthroscopy 2007; 23: 291–298.

Järvelä

Moisala

A-S

Paakkala

. Tunnel enlargement after double-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a prospective, randomized study. Arthroscopy 2008; 24: 1349–1357.

Silva

Sampaio

Pinto

. Femoral tunnel enlargement after anatomic ACL reconstruction: a biological problem? Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 2010; 18: 1189–1194.

Siebold

Cafaltzis

. Differentiation between intraoperative and postoperative bone tunnel widening and communication in double-bundle anterion cruciate ligament reconstruction: a prospective study. Arthroscopy 2010; 26: 1066–1073.

Lee

Nam

. Analysis of tunnel widening after double-bundle ACL reconstruction. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 2012; 20: 2243–2250.

Bowers

Bedi

Lipman

. Comparison of anterior cruciate ligament tunnel position and graft obliquity with transtibial and anteromedial portal femoral tunnel reaming techniques using high-resolution magnetic resonance imaging. Arthroscopy 2011; 27: 1511–1522.

10.

Moisala

A-S

Järvelä

Paakkala

. Comparison of the bioabsorbable and metal screw fixation after ACL reconstruction with a hamstring autograft in MRI and clinical outcome: a prospective randomized study. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 2008; 16: 1080–1086.

11.

Jagodzinski

Geiges

von Falck

. Biodegradable screw versus a press-fit bone plug fixation for hamstring anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a prospective randomized study. Am J Sports Med 2010; 38: 501–508.

12.

Kawaguchi

Kondo

Kitamura

. Comparisons of femoral tunnel enlargement in 169 patients between single-bundle and anatomic double-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstructions with hamstring tendon grafts. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 2011; 19: 1249–1257.

13.

Clatworthy

Annear

Bulow

. Tunnel widening in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a prospective evaluation of hamstring and patella tendon grafts. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 1999; 7: 138–145.

14.

Wilson

Kantaras

Atay

. Tunnel enlargement after anterior cruciate ligament surgery. Am J Sports Med 2004; 32: 543–549.

15.

Hantes

Liantsis

Basdekis

. Evaluation of the bone bridge between the bone tunnels after anatomic double-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a multidetector computed tomography study. Am J Sports Med 2010; 38: 1618–1625.

16.

Kiekara

Järvelä

Huhtala

. MRI of double-bundle ACL reconstruction: evaluation of graft findings. Skeletal Radiol 2012; 41: 835–842.

17.

Järvelä

. Double-bundle versus single-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a prospective, randomized clinical study. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 2007; 15: 500–507.

18.

Lorenz

Elser

Mitterer

. Radiologic evaluation of the insertion sites of the 2 functional bundles of the anterior cruciate ligament using 3-dimensional computed tomography. Am J Sports Med 2009; 37: 2368–2376.

19.

Bland

Altman

. Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurements. Lancet 1986; 8: 307–310.

20.

Yamamoto

Hsu

Woo

. Knee stability and graft function after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a comparison of a lateral and an anatomical femoral tunnel placement. Am J Sports Med 2004; 32: 1825–1832.

21.

Colombet

Robinson

Christel

. Morphology of anterior cruciate ligament attachments for anatomic reconstruction: a cadaveric dissection and radiographic study. Arthroscopy 2006; 22: 984–992.

22.

Edwards

Bull

Amis

. The attachments of the anteromedial and posterolateral fibre bundles of the anterior cruciate ligament: Part 2: femoral attachment. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 2008; 16: 29–36.

23.

Tsukada

Ishibashi

Tsuda

. Anatomical analysis of the anterior cruciate ligament femoral and tibial footprints. J Orthop Sci 2008; 13: 122–129.

24.

Zantop

Diermann

Schumacher

. Anatomical and nonanatomical double-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: importance of femoral tunnel location on knee kinematics. Am J Sports Med 2008; 36: 678–685.

25.

Bernard

Hertel

Hornung

. Femoral insertion of the ACL: radiographic quadrant method. Am J Knee Surg 1997; 10: 14–22.

26.

Forsythe

Kopf

Wong

. The location of femoral and tibial tunnels in anatomic double-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction analyzed by three-dimensional computed tomography models. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2010; 92: 1418–1426.

27.

Staubli

Rauschning

. Tibial attachment area of the anterior cruciate ligament in the extended knee position: anatomy and cryosections in vitro coplemented by magnetic resonance imaging in vivo. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 1994; 2: 138–146.

28.

Han

Kurzencwyg

Hart

. Measuring the anterior cruciate ligament’s footprints by three-dimensional magnetic resonance imaging. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 2012; 20: 986–995.

29.

Buelow

Siebold

Ellermann

. A prospective evaluation of tunnel enlargement in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction with hamstrings: extracortical versus anatomical fixation. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthtrosc 2002; 10: 80–85.