Comparison of Modified Transtibial and Outside-In Techniques in Anatomic Single-Bundle Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction.

PURPOSE

To compare the bending angle of anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) graft at femoral tunnel, graft maturation, and tunnel positions and the clinical outcomes of the modified transtibial (mTT) and outside-in (OI) techniques.

METHODS

Patients who met the inclusion criteria were divided into the mTT group (n = 50) and the OI group (n = 50). Using 3-dimensional computed tomography (3-D CT), tunnel placement and femoral tunnel bending angle were analyzed. The 3.0-T magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) was used to assess the graft signal intensity (indicative of maturation) with signal/noise quotient (SNQ). Graft tension and synovialization were evaluated with second-look arthroscopy in all cases. Clinical and functional tests were completed at 36 months of follow-up.

RESULTS

When tunnel placements were analyzed using the quadrant method, no significant differences were found between the mTT group and the OI group. The femoral graft bending angle was reduced in the mTT group, and the total mean of SNQ values and mean SNQ values at the femoral intraosseous and proximal graft of the mTT group were significantly lower than in the OI group (P < .001), respectively. The femoral graft bending angle on the coronal and axial planes showed moderate-to-strong correlation with the SNQ values at the femoral intraosseous and proximal graft. Second-look arthroscopy revealed better synovialization in the mTT group than in the OI group (P = .040), with no significant difference in graft tension between the 2 groups (P = .328).

CONCLUSIONS

Anatomic tunnel placements did not vary between the mTT group and the OI group. However, the mTT group had more benefits in femoral graft bending angle and showed higher graft maturity and better synovial coverage than the OI group, although there were no significant differences in clinical outcomes. The acute femoral graft bending angle might negatively affect the maturation of proximal graft. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, retrospective comparative study.