Ryu Dong Jin, Kim Seoyeong, Kim Minji, Kim Joo Hwan, Kim Won Jae, Lim Dohyung, Wang Joon Ho
Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Inha University Hospital, Inha University School of Medicine, Incheon, South Korea.
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Sejong University, Seoul, South Korea.
Knee Surg Relat Res. 2024 Aug 29;36(1):26. doi: 10.1186/s43019-024-00230-9.
This study aimed to evaluate the femoral tunnel position and fiber length of the anterolateral ligament (ALL) reconstruction compared with the natural anatomy of the ALL. We also evaluated whether the femoral tunnel position would affect residual pivot shift.
This study was a retrospective review of 55 knees that underwent ALL reconstruction considering the anatomical and functional aspects, during primary anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction in the presence of a high-grade pivot shift or revisional ACL reconstruction. We determined the position of the femoral tunnel and the length of graft using a three-dimensional (3D)-computed tomography (CT) model after ALL reconstruction. We also measured graft excursion during surgery and examined pivot shift 2 years after surgery. We conducted a subgroup analysis of femoral tunnel position, fiber length, isometricity, and residual pivot shift depending on whether the tunnel was anterior or posterior to the lateral epicondyle (LE). We also performed a subgroup analysis depending on whether the ACL reconstruction was primary or revisional.
The mean femoral tunnel position was 2.04 mm posterior and 14.5 mm proximal from the center of the LE. The mean lengths of the anterior and posterior fibers were 66.6 and 63.4 mm, respectively. The femoral tunnel was positioned more proximally than the anatomical position, and both anterior and posterior ALL fibers were longer than the natural anatomy. The anteroposterior femoral tunnel position was significantly correlated with anterior (p = 0.045) and posterior (p = 0.037) fiber excursion. In the subgroup analysis, there was no significant difference in the residual pivot shift between the posterior and anterior tunnel positions. However, there were significant differences for proximal position (p < 0.001) and fiber length (p = 0.006). There was no significant difference between primary and revisional ACL regarding femoral tunnel position and fiber lengths.
It is challenging to reproduce both anatomical and functional aspects of ALL reconstruction in both primary and revision ACL reconstruction. Especially for functional reconstruction, the femoral tunnel tended to be positioned more proximally than the anatomical position. However, the femoral tunnel position did not affect functional clinical outcomes at the 2-year follow-up.
Level IV Case series.
本研究旨在评估前外侧韧带(ALL)重建的股骨隧道位置和纤维长度,并与ALL的自然解剖结构进行比较。我们还评估了股骨隧道位置是否会影响残余轴移。
本研究是一项回顾性研究,纳入了55例在初次前交叉韧带(ACL)重建伴高度轴移或翻修ACL重建时,从解剖学和功能方面考虑进行ALL重建的膝关节。ALL重建后,我们使用三维(3D)计算机断层扫描(CT)模型确定股骨隧道的位置和移植物的长度。我们还在手术中测量了移植物的偏移,并在术后2年检查了轴移情况。我们根据隧道位于外侧髁(LE)前方还是后方,对股骨隧道位置、纤维长度、等长性和残余轴移进行了亚组分析。我们还根据ACL重建是初次还是翻修进行了亚组分析。
股骨隧道的平均位置在LE中心后方2.04 mm、近端14.5 mm处。前后纤维的平均长度分别为66.6和63.4 mm。股骨隧道的位置比解剖位置更靠近近端,并且ALL的前后纤维均比自然解剖结构更长。股骨隧道的前后位置与前后(p = 0.045)和后(p = 0.037)纤维偏移显著相关。在亚组分析中,隧道前后位置之间的残余轴移没有显著差异。然而,近端位置(p < 0.001)和纤维长度(p = 0.006)存在显著差异。初次和翻修ACL在股骨隧道位置和纤维长度方面没有显著差异。
在初次和翻修ACL重建中,要同时重现ALL重建的解剖学和功能方面具有挑战性。特别是对于功能重建,股骨隧道的位置往往比解剖位置更靠近近端。然而,在2年随访时,股骨隧道位置并未影响功能临床结果。
IV级病例系列。