Double-Bundle Versus Single-Bundle Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction in Patients With Significant Passive Anterior Tibial Subluxation

Abstract

Background:

Passive anterior tibial subluxation (PATS) is often observed in patients with anterior cruciate ligament tears. Postoperative outcomes of double-bundle (DB) and single-bundle (SB) anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) with significant PATS (>6 mm) are unclear.

Hypothesis:

DB-ACLR could achieve better stability and clinical outcomes than SB-ACLR in patients with PATS >6 mm.

Study Design:

Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3.

Methods:

Retrospective analysis was peformed on 626 consecutive patients who underwent primary anatomic ACLR between October 2016 and November 2017. Anterior subluxation of the lateral and medial compartments in extension relative to the femoral condyles was measured on preoperative magnetic resonance imaging scans. Among patients who demonstrated significant PATS (>6 mm) in the lateral compartment, 54 who underwent DB-ACLR (study group) were matched to 54 who underwent SB-ACLR (control group). PATS, stability (pivot-shift test and KT-2000 arthrometer), the Lysholm score, and the International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) grade were investigated preoperatively and at 3- to 4-year follow-up.

Results:

The preoperative mean PATS values in the lateral and medial compartments were not significantly different between groups (control vs study: lateral compartment, 8.1 ± 1.8 vs 8.5 ± 2.1 mm; medial compartment, 5.2 ± 1.9 vs 5.4 ± 1.9 mm; P > .05). Postoperatively, mean PATS values in the lateral and medial compartments of the study group were significantly improved as compared with the control group (control vs study: lateral compartment, 5.9 ± 2.8 vs 3.2 ± 4.1 mm; medial compartment, 3.7 ± 2.9 vs 1.4 ± 2.3 mm; P < .05). Significantly superior results were found for knee stability in the study group regarding the Lachman test (grade 0/1/2/3, study vs control: 29/22/3/0 vs 16/28/10/0; P = .031), pivot-shift test (grade 0/1/2/3, study vs control: 44/9/1/0 vs 30/19/5/0; P = .023), and KT-2000 arthrometer (study vs control: 2.5 ± 1.5 vs 3.9 ± 1.4 mm; P < .001). Clinical scores showed significantly better results in the study group in terms of IKDC score (study vs control: 87.9 ± 8.7 vs 81.2 ± 15.0; P = .01), Tegner activity score (study vs control: 6.0 ± 1.4 vs 4.9 ± 1.5; P < .001), and Lysholm score (study vs control: 91.7 ± 7.0 vs 86.3 ± 11.4; P = .004).

Conclusion:

DB-ACLR achieved better knee stability and clinical outcomes when compared with SB-ACLR in patients with PATS >6 mm at 3- to 4-year follow-up.

Keywords

anterior cruciate ligament passive anterior tibial subluxation single bundle double bundle knee stability

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Ahn

Lee

Mun

Kim

. Degree of anterolateral ligament injury impacts outcomes after double-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Arthroscopy. 2021;37(1):222-230.

Almekinders

Chiavetta

. Tibial subluxation in anterior cruciate ligament–deficient knees: implications for tibial tunnel placement. Arthroscopy. 2001;17(9):960-962.

Almekinders

Chiavetta

Clarke

. Radiographic evaluation of anterior cruciate ligament graft failure with special reference to tibial tunnel placement. Arthroscopy. 1998;14(2):206-211.

Almekinders

Pandarinath

Rahusen

. Knee stability following anterior cruciate ligament rupture and surgery: the contribution of irreducible tibial subluxation. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2004;86(5):983-987.

Araujo

Asai

Pinto

, et al. ACL graft position affects in situ graft force following ACL reconstruction. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2015;97(21):1767-1773.

Arciero

. Double-bundle and single-bundle ACL reconstruction techniques did not differ in terms of clinical outcomes at 2 or 5 years. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2016;98(22):1933-1934.

Bedi

Musahl

Lane

, et al. Lateral compartment translation predicts the grade of pivot shift: a cadaveric and clinical analysis. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2010;18(9):1269-1276.

Belk

Kraeutler

Houck

McCarty

. Knee osteoarthritis after single-bundle versus double-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a systematic review of randomized controlled trials. Arthroscopy. 2019;35(3):996-1003.

Conte

Hyatt

Gatt

Jr Dhawan

. Hamstring autograft size can be predicted and is a potential risk factor for anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction failure. Arthroscopy. 2014;30(7):882-890.

10.

Grassi

Macchiarola

Urrizola Barrientos

, et al. Steep posterior tibial slope, anterior tibial subluxation, deep posterior lateral femoral condyle, and meniscal deficiency are common findings in multiple anterior cruciate ligament failures: an MRI case-control study. Am J Sports Med. 2019;47(2):285-295.

11.

Hardy

Klouche

Szarzynski

, et al. A threshold value of 3.5 mm of passive anterior tibial subluxation on MRI is highly specific for complete ACL tears. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2019;27(3):885-892.

12.

Inderhaug

Drogset

Lygre

SHL

Gifstad

. No effect of graft size or body mass index on risk of revision after ACL reconstruction using hamstrings autograft. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2020;28(3):707-713.

13.

Iwaki

Pinskerova

Freeman

. Tibiofemoral movement 1: the shapes and relative movements of the femur and tibia in the unloaded cadaver knee. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2000;82(8):1189-1195.

14.

Jarvela

Kiekara

Suomalainen

Jarvela

. Double-bundle versus single-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a prospective randomized study with 10-year results. Am J Sports Med. 2017;45(11):2578-2585.

15.

Kamien

Hydrick

Replogle

Barrett

. Age, graft size, and Tegner activity level as predictors of failure in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction with hamstring autograft. Am J Sports Med. 2013;41(8):1808-1812.

16.

Katakura

Nakamura

Watanabe

, et al. Risk factors for residual anterolateral rotational instability after double bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: evaluation by quantitative assessment of the pivot shift phenomenon using triaxial accelerometer. Knee. 2020;27(1):95-101.

17.

Kondo

Yasuda

Azuma

Tanabe

Yagi

. Prospective clinical comparisons of anatomic double-bundle versus single-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction procedures in 328 consecutive patients. Am J Sports Med. 2008;36(9):1675-1687.

18.

Lian

Novaretti

Sheean

, et al. Static lateral tibial plateau subluxation predicts high-grade rotatory knee laxity in anterior cruciate ligament–deficient knees. Am J Sports Med. 2019;47(2):277-284.

19.

Lubowitz

. Anatomic ACL reconstruction produces greater graft length change during knee range-of-motion than transtibial technique. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2014;22(5):1190-1195.

20.

Maeyama

Hoshino

Kato

, et al. Anatomic double bundle ACL reconstruction outperforms any types of single bundle ACL reconstructions in controlling dynamic rotational laxity. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2018;26(5):1414-1419.

21.

Magnussen

Lawrence

West

, et al. Graft size and patient age are predictors of early revision after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction with hamstring autograft. Arthroscopy. 2012;28(4):526-531.

22.

Mao

Wang

, et al. Double-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction technique has advantages in chondroprotection and knee laxity control compared with single-bundle technique: a long-term follow-up with a minimum of 12 years. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2021;29(9):3105-3114.

23.

Markolf

Burchfield

Shapiro

, et al. Biomechanical consequences of replacement of the anterior cruciate ligament with a patellar ligament allograft. Part II: forces in the graft compared with forces in the intact ligament. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1996;78(11):1728-1734.

24.

McDonald

van der List

Jones

, et al. Passive anterior tibial subluxation in the setting of anterior cruciate ligament injuries. Am J Sports Med. 2017;45(7):1537-1546.

25.

Mishima

Takahashi

Kondo

Ishiguro

. Anterior tibial subluxation in anterior cruciate ligament–deficient knees: quantification using magnetic resonance imaging. Arthroscopy. 2005;21(10):1193-1196.

26.

Muller

Duerr

van Dijk

. Anatomic anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: reducing anterior tibial subluxation. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2016;24(9):3005-3010.

27.

Nitri

Rasmussen

Williams

, et al. An in vitro robotic assessment of the anterolateral ligament, part 2: anterolateral ligament reconstruction combined with anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Am J Sports Med. 2016;44(3):593-601.

28.

Noyes

Huser

Jurgensmeier

Walsh

Levy

. Is an anterolateral ligament reconstruction required in ACL-reconstructed knees with associated injury to the anterolateral structures? A robotic analysis of rotational knee stability. Am J Sports Med. 2017;45(5):1018-1027.

29.

Noyes

Huser

Levy

. The effect of an ACL reconstruction in controlling rotational knee stability in knees with intact and physiologic laxity of secondary restraints as defined by tibiofemoral compartment translations and graft forces. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2018;100(7):586-597.

30.

Rasmussen

Nitri

Williams

, et al. An in vitro robotic assessment of the anterolateral ligament, part 1: secondary role of the anterolateral ligament in the setting of an anterior cruciate ligament injury. Am J Sports Med. 2016;44(3):585-592.

31.

Song

Zhang

, et al. Excessive preoperative anterior tibial subluxation in extension is associated with inferior knee stability after anatomic anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Am J Sports Med. 2020;48(3):573-580.

32.

Spragg

Chen

Mirzayan

Love

Maletis

. The effect of autologous hamstring graft diameter on the likelihood for revision of anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Am J Sports Med. 2016;44(6):1475-1481.

33.

Svantesson

Sundemo

Hamrin Senorski

, et al. Double-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction is superior to single-bundle reconstruction in terms of revision frequency: a study of 22,460 patients from the Swedish National Knee Ligament Register. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2017;25(12):3884-3891.

34.

Tanaka

Jones

Gargiulo

, et al. Passive anterior tibial subluxation in anterior cruciate ligament–deficient knees. Am J Sports Med. 2013;41(10):2347-2352.

35.

Tsai

Wijdicks

Walsh

LaPrade

. Comparative kinematic evaluation of all-inside single-bundle and double-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a biomechanical study. Am J Sports Med. 2010;38(2):263-272.

36.

Wang

Lin

. Analysis of influence factor for the failure of anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Article in Chinese. Zhongguo Xiu Fu Chong Jian Wai Ke Za Zhi. 2019;33(12):1543-1546.

37.

Wernecke

Constantinidis

Harris

, et al. The diameter of single bundle, hamstring autograft does not significantly influence revision rate or clinical outcomes after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Knee. 2017;24(5):1033-1038.

38.

Yagi

Kuroda

Nagamune

Yoshiya

Kurosaka

. Double-bundle ACL reconstruction can improve rotational stability. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2007;454:100-107.

39.

Ziegler

DePhillipo

Kennedy

, et al. Beighton Score, tibial slope, tibial subluxation, quadriceps circumference difference, and family history are risk factors for anterior cruciate ligament graft failure: a retrospective comparison of primary and revision anterior cruciate ligament reconstructions. Arthroscopy. 2021;37(1):195-205.