scholarly journals Single Versus Double-Bundle PCL Reconstruction: Scientific Rationale and Clinical Evidence

2018 ◽  
Vol 11 (2) ◽  
pp. 285-289 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christopher J. Tucker ◽  
Patrick W. Joyner ◽  
Nathan K. Endres
Author(s):  
Erik Therrien ◽  
Ayoosh Pareek ◽  
Bryant M. Song ◽  
Ryan R. Wilbur ◽  
Michael J. Stuart ◽  
...  

AbstractMany different techniques with multiple graft types have been described for the reconstruction of the injured posterior cruciate ligament (PCL); autograft versus allograft, single- versus double-bundle, open inlay versus arthroscopic inlay versus arthroscopic transtibial, and recently described the arthroscopic “all-inside” socket technique. Reported clinical outcomes have demonstrated no significant difference in any of these PCL reconstruction techniques, likely because of the heterogeneity in injury characteristics and patient population. The ideal surgical technique should be safe, simple, and reproducible while allowing treatment of concomitant knee injuries resulting and return to function.


Author(s):  
James P. Stannard ◽  
Joseph Temperato ◽  
James T. Stannard

AbstractThe optimal surgical technique for posterior cruciate ligament (PCL) reconstruction is a topic of debate among knee surgeons. There are many variables to consider including graft selection, graft fixation method, and single- versus double-bundle reconstruction. While there is a need for ongoing research to elucidate which technique yields the best results, this article discusses recent literature on the topic of single- versus double-bundle PCL reconstruction as well as the senior author's preferred reconstruction method.


Author(s):  
Stockton Troyer ◽  
Nicolas G Anchustegui ◽  
Connor G Richmond ◽  
Peter C Cannamela ◽  
Aleksei Dingel ◽  
...  

BackgroundAnatomic studies of the paediatric posterior cruciate ligament (PCL) demonstrate that the tibial attachment spans the epiphysis, physis and metaphysis. To better reproduce the anatomy of the PCL and avoid direct physeal injury, a double-bundle PCL reconstruction technique that includes both an all-epiphysial and an all-metaphyseal tibial tunnel has been proposed. The purpose of this study was to evaluate tibial tunnel placement in a paediatric double-bundle PCL reconstruction technique that avoids direct physeal injury using a 3-D computer model.MethodsTen skeletally immature cadaveric knee specimens (ages 5–11) were used to create 3-D model reconstructions from CT scans. All-metaphyseal and all-epiphysial tibial tunnels were simulated with the goal of maintaining adequate spacing (≥2 mm) between the tibial physis and tunnels to avoid injury. The all-metaphyseal tunnel, simulated at sizes of 5, 6 and 7 mm, entered anteriorly, below the tibial tubercle (apophysis) and exited posteriorly in the metaphyseal PCL footprint, distal to the proximal tibial physis. Four-millimetre all-epiphysial proximal tibial tunnels were simulated to enter the epiphysis anteromedially and exit posteriorly at the central epiphysial region of the PCL footprint, proximal to the physis. The distance was measured from the all-metaphyseal tunnels to the physis posteriorly and from the all-epiphysial tunnels to the physis, both anteriorly and posteriorly.ResultsIn all specimens, the 4 mm all-epiphysial tunnel and the 5, 6 and 7 mm all-metaphyseal tunnels maintained adequate spacing, ≥2 mm from the physis. In the specimens aged 5–7 years, the 5, 6 and 7 mm all-metaphyseal tunnels measured a mean distance of 3.5, 2.8 and 2.5 mm from the physis, respectively. In the specimens aged 8–11 years, the 5, 6 and 7 mm all-metaphyseal tunnels measured a mean distance of 3.4, 2.9 and 2.6 mm from the physis. In the specimens aged 5–7 years, the all-epiphysial tunnel measured a mean of 2.1 mm to the physis anteriorly and a mean of 2.8 mm posteriorly. In the specimens aged 8–11 years, the all-epiphysial tunnel measured a mean of 2.2 mm to the physis anteriorly and 2.4 mm posteriorly.ConclusionThese computer-aided 3-D models of paediatric knees illustrate that 5, 6 and 7 mm all-metaphyseal tunnels as well as 4 mm all-epiphysial tunnels can be placed without direct injury to the proximal tibial physis. The margin of error for direct physeal injury is small, especially for the all-epiphysial tunnel. Further, the all-epiphysial tunnel, while reproducing the anatomy of the PCL epiphysial attachment, may also produce a more extreme ‘killer turn’ of the graft. Modifications to the all-epiphysial tunnel may be considered to reduce the impact of the high ‘killer turn’ angle on the tibia.Level of evidenceIV.


2012 ◽  
Vol 25 (03) ◽  
pp. 237-244 ◽  
Author(s):  
Antonio Maestro ◽  
Alberto Sicilia ◽  
Luis Rodriguez ◽  
Pedro Garcia ◽  
Jesus Fdez-Lombardia ◽  
...  

2003 ◽  
Vol 11 (4) ◽  
pp. 286-293 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hussein A Elkousy ◽  
Christopher D Harner

The Knee ◽  
2014 ◽  
Vol 21 (3) ◽  
pp. 763-768 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ricardo de Paula Leite Cury ◽  
Marcos Barbieri Mestriner ◽  
Camila Cohen Kaleka ◽  
Nilson Roberto Severino ◽  
Victor Marques de Oliveira ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document