Intraoperative Biomechanical Evaluation of Anatomic Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction Using a Navigation System Comparison of Hamstring Tendon and Bone-Patellar Tendon-Bone Graft
Restricted accessResearch articleFirst published online October, 2008
Intraoperative Biomechanical Evaluation of Anatomic Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction Using a Navigation System Comparison of Hamstring Tendon and Bone-Patellar Tendon-Bone Graft
Recently, more anatomic anterior cruciate ligament reconstructions have been developed to improve knee laxity.
Purpose:
The objective of this study is to assess knee kinematics after double-bundle reconstruction with hamstring tendon and after anatomically oriented reconstruction with a patellar tendon using navigation during surgery.
Study Design:
Cross-sectional study; Level of evidence, 3.
Methods:
Eighty knees received double-bundle reconstruction with a hamstring tendon graft, and 45 knees received anatomically oriented reconstruction with a patellar tendon graft. Before reconstruction, knee laxity was measured using a navigation system. After the posterolateral bundle or anteromedial bundle was temporarily fixed during double-bundle reconstruction, knee laxity was measured to assess the function of each bundle. After double-bundle reconstruction or anatomically oriented reconstruction with patellar tendon, knee laxity was measured in the same manner.
Results:
Both double-bundle reconstruction and anatomically oriented reconstruction similarly improved knee laxity compared With before reconstruction in all knee flexion angles. Regarding the function of the anteromedial and posterolateral bundles in double-bundle reconstruction, the 2 grafts showed contrasting behavior. The posterolateral bundle restrained tibial displacement mainly in knee extension, whereas the anteromedial bundle restrained it more in the knee flexion position. The posterolateral bundle has a more important role in controlling rotation of the tibia than the anteromedial bundle.
Conclusion:
Although the posterolateral bundle has an important role in the extension position, the anteromedial bundle is more important in the flexion position. Therefore, both bundles should be reconstructed to improve knee laxity throughout knee range of motion. Even with single-bundle reconstruction using a patellar tendon, anatomic reconstruction might improve knee laxity similar to double-bundle reconstruction.
BiauDJTournouxCKatsahianSSchranzPNizardFT. ACL reconstruction: A meta-analysis of functional scores. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2007;458:180–187.
4.
ColombetPRobinsonJChristelPFranceschiJPDjianP. Using navigation to measure rotation kinematics during ACL reconstruction. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2007;454:59–65.
5.
FithianDCPaxtonEWStoneML. Prospective trial of a treatment algorithm for the management of the anterior cruciate ligament-injured knee. Am J Sports Med. 2005;33:335–346.
6.
FukubayashiTTorzilliPAShermanMRWarrenRF. An in vitro biomechanical evaluation of anterior-posterior motion of the knee: Tibial displacement, rotation, and torque. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1982;64:258–264.
7.
GabrielMTWongEKWooSL-YYagiMDebskiRE. Distribution of in situ forces in the anterior cruciate ligament in response to rotatory loads. J Orthop Res. 2004;22:85–89.
8.
GillquistJMessnerK. Anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction and the long-term incidence of gonarthrosis. Sports Med. 1999;27:143–156.
9.
GirgisFGMarshallJLMonajemA. The cruciate ligaments of the knee joint: Anatomical, functional and experimental analysis. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1975;106:216–231.
10.
GoldblattJPFitzsimmonsSEBalkERichmondJC. Reconstruction of the anterior cruciate ligament: Meta-analysis of patellar tendon versus hamstring tendon autograft. Arthroscopy. 2005;21:791–803.
11.
HamadaMShinoKHoribeS. Single- versus bi-socket anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction using autogenous multiplestranded hamstring tendons with EndoButton femoral fixation: A prospective study. Arthroscopy. 2001;17:801–807.
12.
HarnerCDPoehlingGG. Double bundle or double trouble?Arthroscopy. 2004;20:1013–1014.
13.
HerringtonLWrapsonCMatthewsMMatthewsH. Anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction, hamstring versus bone-patella tendon-bone grafts: A systematic literature review of outcome from surgery. Knee. 2005;12:41–50.
14.
HiraokaHKuribayashiSFukudaAFukuiNNakamuraK. Endoscopic anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction using a computer-assisted fluoroscopic navigation system. J Orthop Sci. 2006;11:159–166.
15.
IshibashiYTsudaEFukudaATsukadaHTohS. Future of double-bundle anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction: Incorporation of ACL anatomic data into the navigation system. Orthopedics. 2006;29(Suppl):S108–S112.
16.
IshibashiYTsudaETazawaKSatoHTohS. Intraoperative evaluation of the anatomical double-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction with the OrthoPilot navigation system. Orthopedics. 2005;28(Suppl):S1277–S1282.
17.
JohnsonRJBeynnonBDNicholsCERenstromPA. The treatment of injuries of the anterior cruciate ligament. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1992;74:140–151.
18.
JordanSSDeFraeLENhaKWPapannagariRGillTJLiG. The in vivo kinematics of the anteromedial and posterolateral bundles of the anterior cruciate ligament during weightbearing knee flexion. Am J Sports Med. 2007;35:547–554.
19.
KatzJWFingerothRJ. The diagnostic accuracy of ruptures of the anterior cruciate ligament comparing the Lachman test, the anterior drawer sign, and the pivot shift test in acute and chronic knee injuries. Am J Sports Med. 1986;14:88–91.
20.
KendoffDBogojevicACitakM. Experimental validation of noninvasive referencing in navigated procedures on long bones. J Orthop Res. 2007;25:201–207.
21.
KohJKooSSLeonardJKodaliP. Anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) tunnel placement: A radiographic comparison between navigated versus manual ACL reconstruction. Orthopedics. 2006;29(Suppl):S122–S124.
22.
LohJCFukudaYTsudaESteadmanRJFuFHWooSL. Knee stability and graft function following anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: Comparison between 11 o'clock and 10 o'clock femoral tunnel placement. Arthroscopy. 2003;19:297–304.
23.
MaeTShinoKMiyamaT. Single- versus two-femoral socket anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction technique: Biomechanical analysis using a robotic simulator. Arthroscopy. 2001;17:708–716.
24.
MochizukiTMunetaTNagaseTShirasawaSAkitaKISekiyaI. Cadaveric knee observation study for describing anatomic femoral tunnel placement for two-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Arthroscopy. 2006;22:356–361.
25.
MunetaTKogaHMoritoTYagishitaKSekiyaI. A retrospective study of the midterm outcome of two-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction using quadrupled semitendinosus tendon in comparison with one-bundle reconstruction. Arthroscopy. 2006;22:252–258.
26.
MunetaTSekiyaIYagishitaKOgiuchiTYamamotoHShinomiyaK. Two-bundle reconstruction of the anterior cruciate ligament using semitendinosus tendon with endobuttons: Operative technique and preliminary results. Arthroscopy. 1999;15:618–624.
27.
OtsukaHIshibashiYTsudaESasakiKTohS. Comparison of three techniques of anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction with bone-patellar tendon-bone graft: Differences in anterior tibial translation and tunnel enlargement with each technique. Am J Sports Med. 2003;31:282–288.
28.
PicardFDiGioiaAMMoodyJ. Accuracy in tunnel placement for ACL reconstruction: Comparison of traditional arthroscopic and computer-assisted navigation techniques. Computer Aided Surg. 2001;6:279–289.
29.
SakaneMFoxRJWooSL-YLivesayGALiGFuFH. In situ forces in the anterior cruciate ligament and its bundles in response to anterior tibial loads. J Orthop Res. 1997;15:285–293.
30.
SapegaAAMoyerRASchneckCKomalahiranyaN. Testing for isometry during reconstruction of the anterior cruciate ligament: Anatomical and biomechanical considerations. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1990;72:259–267.
31.
ShinoKNakataKNakamuraNToritsukaYNakagawaSHoribeS. Anatomically oriented anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction with a bone-patellar tendon-bone graft via rectangular socket and tunnel: A snug-fit and impingement-free grafting technique. Arthroscopy. 2005;21:1402(e1-e5).
32.
SternHPBradleyRHPrinceMTStrohSE. Young children in recreational sports: Participation motivation. Clin Pediatr. 1990;29:89–94.
TsudaEOkamuraYIshibashiYOtsukaHTohS. Techniques for reducing anterior knee symptoms after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction using a bone-patellar tendon-bone autograft. Am J Sports Med. 2001;29:450–456.
35.
von PoratARoosEMRoosH. High prevalence of osteoarthritis 14 years after an anterior cruciate ligament tear in male soccer players: A study of radiographic and patient relevant outcomes. Ann Rheum Dis. 2004;63:269–273.
36.
WooSLKanamoriAZeminskiJYagiMPapageorgiouCFuFH. The effectiveness of reconstruction of the anterior cruciate ligament with hamstrings and patellar tendon: A cadaveric study comparing anterior tibial and rotational loads. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2002;84:907–914.
37.
YagiMWongEKKanamoriADebskiREFuFHWooSL. Biomechanical analysis of an anatomic anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Am J Sports Med. 2002;30:660–666.
38.
YamamotoYHsuWHWooSL-YVan ScyocAHTakakuraYDebskiRE. Knee stability and graft function after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: A comparison of a lateral and an anatomic femoral tunnel placement. Am J Sports Med. 2004;32:1825–1832.
39.
YasudaKKondoEIchiyamaH. Anatomic reconstruction of the anteromedial and posterolateral bundles of the anterior cruciate ligament using hamstring tendon grafts. Arthroscopy. 2004;20:1015–1025.
40.
YasudaKKondoEIchiyamaHTanabeYTohyamaH. Clinical evaluation of anatomic double-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction procedure using hamstring tendon grafts: Comparisons among 3 different procedures. Arthroscopy. 2006;22:240–251.
