DeFroda Steven, Bourbon de Albuquerque João, Bezold Will, Cook Cristi R, Nuelle Clayton W, Stannard James P, Cook James L
Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, University of Missouri, Columbia, Missouri, U.S.A.
Thompson Laboratory for Regenerative Orthopaedics, University of Missouri, Columbia, Missouri, U.S.A.
Arthrosc Sports Med Rehabil. 2024 Feb 29;6(3):100917. doi: 10.1016/j.asmr.2024.100917. eCollection 2024 Jun.
To assess the risk of socket-tunnel overlap for posterior medial or lateral meniscal root repair combined with anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) using artificial tibias and computed tomography scans for 3-dimensional modeling.
Artificial tibias (n = 27; n = 3/subgroup) were allocated to groups based on inclination of socket-tunnels (55°, 60°, 65°) created for posterior root of the medial meniscus (MMPR) and lateral meniscus posterior root (LMPR) repair, and ACLR. Three standardized socket-tunnels were created: one for the ACL and one for each posterior meniscal root insertion. Computed tomography scans were performed and sequentially processed using computer software to produce 3-dimensional models for assessment of socket-tunnel overlap. Statistical analysis was performed with Kruskal-Wallis and Mann-Whitney tests. Significance was set at < .05.
The present study found no significant risk of tunnel overlap when drilling for combined ACLR and MMPR repair, whereas 7 cases of tunnel overlap occurred between ACL tunnels and LMPR (25.9% of cases). No subgroup or specific pattern of angulation consistently presented significantly safer distances than other subgroups for all distances measured.
This study demonstrated 25.9% rate of overlap for combined LMPR repair and ACLR, compared with 0% for MMPR repair with ACLR. Lower ACL drilling angle (55 or 60°) combined with greater lateral meniscus drilling angle (65°) produced no socket-tunnel overlap.
Socket-tunnel overlap during meniscal root repair combined with ACLR may compromise graft integrity and lead to impaired fixation and treatment failure of either the ACL, the meniscus, or both. Despite this, risk for socket-tunnel overlap has not been well characterized.
使用人工胫骨和计算机断层扫描进行三维建模,评估后内侧或外侧半月板根部修复联合前交叉韧带重建(ACLR)时骨隧道-隧道重叠的风险。
根据为内侧半月板后根部(MMPR)和外侧半月板后根部(LMPR)修复及ACLR创建的骨隧道倾斜度(55°、60°、65°),将人工胫骨(n = 27;每组n = 3)分组。创建三个标准化骨隧道:一个用于ACL,一个用于每个后半月板根部植入。进行计算机断层扫描,并使用计算机软件进行顺序处理,以生成用于评估骨隧道重叠的三维模型。采用Kruskal-Wallis检验和Mann-Whitney检验进行统计分析。显著性设定为P <.05。
本研究发现,在联合ACLR和MMPR修复钻孔时,骨隧道重叠风险不显著,而在ACL隧道和LMPR之间发生了7例骨隧道重叠(占病例的25.9%)。对于所有测量距离,没有亚组或特定的成角模式始终显示出比其他亚组明显更安全的距离。
本研究表明,LMPR修复联合ACLR的重叠率为25.9%,而MMPR修复联合ACLR的重叠率为0%。较低的ACL钻孔角度(55°或60°)与较大的外侧半月板钻孔角度(65°)相结合,未产生骨隧道重叠。
半月板根部修复联合ACLR时的骨隧道重叠可能会损害移植物的完整性,并导致ACL、半月板或两者的固定受损和治疗失败。尽管如此,骨隧道重叠的风险尚未得到很好的描述。