Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Hallym University Dongtan Sacred Heart Hospital, Gyeonggi-do, Republic of Korea.
BioComputing Lab, Institute for Bio-engineering Application Technology, School of Computer Science and Engineering, Korea University of Technology and Education (KOREATECH), Cheonan, Republic of Korea.
Medicine (Baltimore). 2021 Nov 12;100(45):e27833. doi: 10.1097/MD.0000000000027833.
To compare the femoral tunnel characteristics using a rigid versus flexible reamer during anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. It was hypothesized that the employment of a flexible reamer along with femoral tunnel would exhibit longer tunnel length and more acute femoral graft tunnel angle compared to the case of a rigid reamer.The study population included 28 patients who underwent anatomical single-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction using transportal technique and were able to take postoperative computed tomography (CT) evaluation. Of these, the femoral tunnel of 14 cases was drilled with a flexible reamer (group I) and in another 14 cases drill was performed with a conventional rigid reamer (group II). The femoral tunnel in group I was made at 90° of knee flexion. In group II, the femoral tunnel was created at 120° of knee flexion. The parameters of the femoral tunnels were compared in terms of the femoral tunnel length and femoral graft tunnel angle. Special software was used to create and manipulate (3-D) 3-dimensional knee models.The difference in the mean femoral tunnel locations expressed in percentage distance between the 2 groups was not significantly different. The mean femoral tunnel length of group I was significantly longer than that of group II, (P = .03, 36.7 ± 2.9 vs 32.9 ± 9.0 mm). The angle formed by the femoral tunnel and the graft in group I was significantly smaller than in group II (P = .01, 109.8° ± 9.4° vs 118.1° ± 7.2°).Our data suggest that the flexible reamer can provide sufficient tunnel length for the suspensory fixation with a fixed loop. Whereas, the femoral graft-tunnel angle through flexible reaming at 90° of knee flexion was more acute compared to rigid reaming at 120° of knee flexion.Study Design: level of evidence III.
比较前交叉韧带重建中使用刚性和柔性扩孔器时的股骨隧道特征。假设与刚性扩孔器相比,使用柔性扩孔器进行股骨隧道时,隧道长度会更长,股骨移植物隧道角度会更陡峭。
研究人群包括 28 例接受经皮技术解剖性单束前交叉韧带重建的患者,并能进行术后计算机断层扫描(CT)评估。其中 14 例股骨隧道采用柔性扩孔器(I 组)钻孔,14 例采用传统刚性扩孔器(II 组)钻孔。I 组的股骨隧道在膝关节屈曲 90°时进行。在 II 组中,股骨隧道在膝关节屈曲 120°时形成。比较两组股骨隧道的参数,包括股骨隧道长度和股骨移植物隧道角度。特殊软件用于创建和操作(3-D)三维膝关节模型。
两组股骨隧道位置的平均值差异以百分比距离表示,差异无统计学意义。I 组股骨隧道的平均长度明显长于 II 组(P=0.03,36.7±2.9 比 32.9±9.0mm)。I 组股骨隧道与移植物形成的角度明显小于 II 组(P=0.01,109.8°±9.4°比 118.1°±7.2°)。
我们的数据表明,柔性扩孔器可以为固定环提供足够的悬吊固定隧道长度。然而,与膝关节屈曲 120°时的刚性扩孔相比,膝关节屈曲 90°时的柔性扩孔形成的股骨移植物隧道角度更陡峭。
证据等级 III。