Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Chonnam National University Hwasun Hospital, College of Medicine, Chonnam National University, 322, Seoyang-ro, Hwasun, Chonnam, 58128, Republic of Korea.
Int Orthop. 2024 Oct;48(10):2641-2652. doi: 10.1007/s00264-024-06271-9. Epub 2024 Aug 27.
To compare the anterior and posterior trans-septal (TS) portal approaches in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) by evaluating femoral tunnel positioning and passive anterior tibial subluxation (PATS).
A total of 205 patients who underwent primary ACLR using the outside-in technique between March 2018 and December 2021 were retrospectively enrolled. Patients were classified into two groups based on the viewing techniques: the anterior group was treated using anteromedial or anterolateral portals (n = 155), and the TS group was treated using posterior TS portal (n = 55). The relative locations of the femoral tunnel were evaluated using the deep-shallow planes (X-axis) and superior-inferior planes (Y-axis) with the quadrant method in the lateral femoral condyle on a 3-dimensional computed tomography image. Anterior tibial subluxation for the lateral and medial compartments relative to the femoral condyles was evaluated as measured on magnetic resonance imaging. Knee laxity was assessed using the pivot-shift test and stress radiography.
In the posterior TS group, the femoral tunnel was usually located deeper on the X-axis and more superior on the Y-axis, which corresponds to a more proximal position, than in the anterior group (deeper on the X-axis and superior on the Y-axis). Moreover, the femoral tunnel locations in this group were more compactly distributed than those in the anterior group. The TS group showed significantly better reduction of postoperative PATS in the lateral compartments than the anterior group (anterior group vs. TS group: lateral compartment, 3.2 ± 3.1 vs. 4.5 ± 3.2 mm; p = .016). Significantly better results were found in the TS group for knee stability as assessed by the pivot-shift grade (p = .044); however, there were no significant differences between the two groups with respect to patient-reported outcome measures (p > .05) and other complications (p = .090).
Our results suggest that positioning the femoral tunnel using the posterior TS portal approach may lead to better outcomes in terms of PATS and rotational stability compared to the anterior portal approach in ACLR.
通过评估股骨隧道定位和被动胫骨前脱位(PATS),比较前交叉韧带重建(ACLR)中前隔(TS)和后隔(TS)的经隔入路。
回顾性纳入 2018 年 3 月至 2021 年 12 月期间采用经皮技术行初次 ACLR 的 205 例患者。根据观察技术将患者分为两组:前组采用前内侧或前外侧入路(n=155),TS 组采用后 TS 入路(n=55)。在三维 CT 图像上,使用外侧股骨髁的象限法评估股骨隧道的相对位置,分别在深-浅平面(X 轴)和上-下平面(Y 轴)上进行。通过磁共振成像评估相对于股骨髁的外侧和内侧胫骨前脱位。采用前抽屉试验和应力放射学评估膝关节松弛度。
在 TS 后组中,股骨隧道在 X 轴上通常位于更深的位置,在 Y 轴上位于更上的位置,这对应于更靠近近端的位置,与前组相比(X 轴上更深,Y 轴上更上)。此外,与前组相比,该组的股骨隧道位置分布更紧凑。TS 组在外侧胫骨前脱位的术后改善明显优于前组(前组与 TS 组:外侧胫骨前脱位,3.2±3.1 毫米比 4.5±3.2 毫米;p=0.016)。TS 组在膝关节稳定性方面的结果明显优于前抽屉试验分级(p=0.044);然而,两组患者报告的结果测量(p>0.05)和其他并发症(p=0.090)之间无显著差异。
我们的结果表明,与前入路相比,使用后 TS 入路定位股骨隧道可能会在 PATS 和旋转稳定性方面带来更好的结果。