scholarly journals An Analysis of the Femoral Drilling Angle to Avoid Tunnel Collision during Double-Bundle Anterior Cruciate Ligament and Anterolateral Ligament Reconstruction on the Knee

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yusuke Kawanishi ◽  
Makoto Kobayashi ◽  
Sanshiro Yasuma ◽  
Hiroaki Fukushima ◽  
Jiro Kato ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Anterior Cruciate Ligament ◽  
Knee Flexion ◽  
Cruciate Ligament ◽  
Kirschner Wire ◽  
Double Bundle ◽  
Safe Zone ◽  
Anterolateral Ligament ◽  
Anterior Cruciate ◽  
K Wires ◽  
Point Distance

AbstractConcomitant anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) and anterolateral ligament (ALL) reconstruction has been reported as an effective technique for providing rotational control of the knee. However, the intraoperative risk of collision with an ACL tunnel during the drilling for the femoral ALL tunnel has been described. The purpose of this study was to investigate the various femoral drilling procedures to avoid tunnel collisions during combined double-bundle ACL and ALL reconstruction. Nine cadaveric knees were used in this study. ACL drilling was performed through the anteromedial portal to footprints of the posterolateral bundle at 120° (PL120) and 135° (PL135) knee flexion and the anteromedial bundle at 120° (AM120) and 135° (AM135) knee flexion. ALL drilling was performed at 0° (Cor0-ALL) and 30° (Cor30-ALL) coronal angles using a Kirschner wire (K-wire). The distance between the ALL footprint and ACL K-wire outlets, axial angles of ALL K-wires colliding with ACL K-wires, and distances from the ALL footprint to the collision point were measured. From these values, the safe zone, defined as the range of axial angles in which no collisions or penetrations occurred, was identified by simulation of tunnels utilized for reconstruction grafts in each drilling procedure. The point-to-point distance from the ALL footprint to the K-wire outlet was significantly greater in the AM120 than the AM135 (13.5 ± 3.1, 10.8 ± 3.2 mm; p = 0.048) and in the PL135 than the PL120 (18.3 ± 5.5, 16.1 ± 6.5 mm; p = 0.005) conditions, respectively. During an ACL drilling combination of PL135/AM120, a safe zone of > 45° in Cor30-ALL was identified. With a narrow safe zone during the PL135/AM120 combination only, the risk of femoral tunnel collisions in combined double-bundle ACL and ALL reconstruction is high. AM drilling at 120° and PL drilling at > 135° knee flexion, combined with ALL drilling at 30° coronal angle and > 45° axial angle, may reduce this risk.

scholarly journals Anterolateral ligament of the knee: back to the future in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction

2015 ◽  
Vol 7 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Davide Edoardo Bonasia ◽  
Andrea D'Amelio ◽  
Pietro Pellegrino ◽  
Federica Rosso ◽  
Roberto Rossi
Keyword(s):  
Anterior Cruciate Ligament ◽  
Acl Reconstruction ◽  
Cruciate Ligament ◽  
Double Bundle ◽  
Anterolateral Ligament ◽  
Rotational Instability ◽  
Small Subset ◽  
Acl Injuries ◽  
Anterior Cruciate ◽  
Double Bundle Acl Reconstruction

Although the importance of the anterolateral stabilizing structures of the knee in the setting of anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injuries has been recognized since many years, most of orthopedic surgeons do not take into consideration the anterolateral structures when performing an ACL reconstruction. Anatomic single or double bundle ACL reconstruction will improve knee stability, but a small subset of patients may experience some residual anteroposterior and rotational instability. For this reason, some researchers have turned again towards the anterolateral aspect of the knee and specifically the anterolateral ligament. The goal of this review is to summarize the existing knowledge regarding the anterolateral ligament of the knee, including anatomy, histology, biomechanics and imaging. In addition, the most common anterolateral reconstruction/tenodesis techniques are described together with their respective clinical outcomes.

There Are No Kinematic Differences Between Inframeniscal and Suprameniscal Anterolateral Ligament Injury in the Anterior Cruciate Ligament–Deficient Knee

2018 ◽  
Vol 46 (14) ◽  
pp. 3391-3399 ◽  
Author(s):  
Timothy A. Burkhart ◽  
Manoj Matthew ◽  
W. Scott McGuffin ◽  
Alexandra Blokker ◽  
David Holdsworth ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Anterior Cruciate Ligament ◽  
Internal Rotation ◽  
Knee Flexion ◽  
Pivot Shift ◽  
Cruciate Ligament ◽  
Lateral Meniscus ◽  
Anterolateral Ligament ◽  
Anterior Cruciate ◽  
Acl Deficient ◽  
Deficient Knee

Background: Previous research demonstrated that the attachment of the anterolateral ligament (ALL) to the lateral meniscus is stiffer and stronger in its tibial attachment than its femoral attachment. How this relates to anterolateral knee stability and lateral meniscal function is unknown. Hypothesis/Purpose: The hypothesis was that the ALL acts as a peripheral anchor to the lateral meniscus, aiding in anterolateral rotatory stability, and that the inframeniscal fibers of the ALL will provide greater anterolateral rotatory stability because of their greater tensile properties. The purpose was therefore to compare the difference in kinematics of the anterior cruciate ligament (ACL)–deficient knee between the infra- and suprameniscal ALL-sectioned states. Study Design: Controlled laboratory study. Methods: Eight paired fresh-frozen cadaveric knees were tested in a 5–degree of freedom loading jig under the following loading conditions: 5-N·m internal rotation at 15° incremental angles of flexion and combined 5-N·m internal rotation moment, 10-N·m valgus moment, and 88-N anterior translation force representing a pivot shift test at 0°, 15°, and 30° of flexion. The knees were tested under intact, ACL-deficient, and ACL-/ALL-deficient conditions, with the pairs of knees being randomized to either supra- or inframeniscal ALL sectioning. Resultant joint kinematics and tibiofemoral translations were measured and compared with a 2-way mixed repeated measures analysis of variance. Results: Internal rotation increased by 3° after sectioning of the ACL at 0° of knee flexion ( P = .035). At 45° of knee flexion, internal rotation increased significantly by 2° between the ACL-deficient and the ACL-/ALL-deficient conditions ( P = .049). Secondary kinematics of valgus and anterior translation were observed in response to the 5-N·m load after ACL and ALL sectioning. Analysis of the pivot shift showed increases in tibiofemoral translation after sectioning of the ACL, with further translations after sectioning of the ALL. No differences were observed between supra- and inframeniscal ALL sectioning under any of the loading conditions. Conclusion: An injury to the ALL, coexisting with ACL deficiency, results in only minor increases in knee joint patholaxity. No differences in pivot-shift kinematics or tibiofemoral rotations were observed between the supra- and inframeniscal sectioning of the ALL in the ACL-deficient knee Clinical Relevance: Tears of the midbody and/or posterior root attachment of the lateral meniscus are often observed at the time of ACL reconstruction. Increased anterolateral rotatory laxity has been observed in both lateral meniscus– and ALL-deficient states in combination with an ACL injury. While no significant functional relationship was found between the ALL and lateral meniscus, ALL sectioning did result in increased knee joint patholaxity, as demonstrated by composite tibiofemoral rotations.

scholarly journals Biomechanical Effects of Combined Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction and Anterolateral Ligament Reconstruction: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

2021 ◽  
Vol 9 (6) ◽  
pp. 232596712110098
Author(s):  
Shayne R. Kelly ◽  
Brendan M. Cutter ◽  
Eric G. Huish
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Anterior Cruciate Ligament ◽  
Knee Flexion ◽  
Ligament Reconstruction ◽  
Cruciate Ligament ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Anterolateral Ligament ◽  
Anterolateral Ligament Reconstruction ◽  
Meta Regression ◽  
Anterior Cruciate

Background: Combined anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction (ACLR) and anterolateral ligament reconstruction (ALLR) are performed with the intention to restore native knee kinematics after ACL tears. There continue to be varying results as to the difference in kinematics between combined and isolated procedures, including anterior tibial translation (ATT) and internal tibial rotation (IR). Purpose: To perform a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the kinematic changes of a combined ACLR/ALLR versus isolated ACLR and to assess the effects of different fixation techniques. Study Design: Systematic review. Methods: We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of 15 human cadaveric biomechanical studies evaluating combined ACLR/ALLR versus isolated ACLR and their effects on ATT and IR in 149 specimens. The primary outcomes were ATT and IR. Secondary outcomes included graft type and size as well as fixation methods such as type, angle, tension, and position of fixation. Meta-regression was used to examine the effect of various cofactors on the resulting measures. Results: Compared with isolated ACLR, combined ACLR/ALLR decreased ATT and IR by 0.01 mm (95% CI, –0.059 to 0.079 mm; P = .777) and 1.64° (95% CI, 1.30°-1.98°; P < .001), respectively. Regarding ACLR/ALLR, increasing the knee flexion angle and applied IR force led to a significant reduction in IR ( P < .001 and P = .044, respectively). There was also a significant reduction in IR in combined procedures with semitendinosus ALL graft, higher flexion fixation angles, and tension but no change in IR with differing femoral fixation points ( P < .001, P < .001, and P = .268, respectively). Multivariate meta-regression showed that the use of tibial-sided suture anchor fixation significantly reduced IR ( P < .001). Conclusion: These results suggest that a combined ACLR/ALLR procedure significantly decreases IR compared with isolated ACLR, especially at higher knee flexion angles. Semitendinosus ALL graft, fixation at higher knee flexion, increased tensioning, and tibial-sided interference screw fixation in ALLR may help to further reduce IR.

scholarly journals Biomechanical Difference between Conventional Transtibial Single-Bundle and Anatomical Transportal Double-Bundle Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction Using Three-Dimensional Finite Element Model Analysis

2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (8) ◽  
pp. 1625
Author(s):  
Jae Gyoon Kim ◽  
Kyoung Tak Kang ◽  
Joon Ho Wang
Keyword(s):  
Anterior Cruciate Ligament ◽  
Acl Reconstruction ◽  
Knee Flexion ◽  
Cruciate Ligament ◽  
Three Dimensional ◽  
Element Model ◽  
Double Bundle ◽  
Contact Stresses ◽  
Single Bundle ◽  
Anterior Cruciate

The purpose of our study was to analyze the graft contact stress at the tunnel after transtibial single-bundle (SB) and transportal double-bundle (DB) anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction. After transtibial SB (20 cases) and transportal DB (29 cases) ACL reconstruction, the three-dimensional image of each patient made by postoperative computed tomography was adjusted to the validation model of a normal knee and simulated SB and DB ACL reconstructions were created based on the average tunnel position and direction of each group. We also measured graft and contact stresses at the tunnel after a 134 N anterior load from 0° to 90° flexion. The graft and contact stresses became the greatest at 30° and 0° flexion, respectively. The total graft and contact stresses after DB ACL reconstruction were greater than those after SB ACL reconstruction from 0° to 30° and 0° to 90° knee flexion, respectively. However, the graft and contact stresses of each graft after DB ACL reconstruction were less than those after SB ACL reconstruction. In conclusion, the total graft and total contact stresses after DB ACL reconstruction are higher than those after SB ACL reconstruction from 0° to 30° and 0° to 90° knee flexion, respectively. However, the stresses of each graft after DB ACL reconstruction are about half of those after SB ACL reconstruction.

scholarly journals The Accessory Medial Portal for Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: A Safe Zone to Avoid Neurovascular Complications

2020 ◽  
Vol 8 (9) ◽  
pp. 232596712095267
Author(s):  
Kevin D. Plancher ◽  
Jeffrey T. Alwine ◽  
Jimmy J. Chan ◽  
Stephanie C. Petterson
Keyword(s):  
At Risk ◽  
Anterior Cruciate Ligament ◽  
Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction ◽  
Knee Flexion ◽  
Ligament Reconstruction ◽  
Cruciate Ligament ◽  
Safe Zone ◽  
Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction ◽  
Anterior Cruciate ◽  
Neurovascular Structures

Background: The accessory medial portal (AMP) used for anatomic anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) is gaining popularity. This portal is routinely created at 60° of knee flexion, placing the infrapatellar branch of the saphenous nerve (IBSN) and, less commonly, the descending and superior medial genicular arteries at risk. Purpose/Hypothesis: The purpose of this study was to identify a safe zone for AMP placement in ACLR to minimize the risk of injury to the IBSN. We hypothesized that increased knee flexion angles would decrease the risk to neurovascular structures when creating an AMP. Study Design: Descriptive laboratory study. Methods: A total of 20 cadaveric (10 matched pairs) knees were used for dissection to identify the IBSN and other neurovascular structures. A 30° arthroscope was used to make the central medial portal and AMP at 3 knee flexion angles (60°, 90°, and 110°). Distances were measured from the AMP to branches of the IBSN. Safety of AMP placement was analyzed by assessing the frequency at which spinal needles pierced a neurovascular structure or violated a safe zone. Results: The superior IBSN was significantly closer to the AMP than inferior IBSN. The AMP was significantly farther from the superior IBSN at 110° (8.56 ± 5.28 mm) compared with 60° (5.63 ± 5.00 mm; P = .015) and 90° (6.69 ± 5.03 mm; P = .006). A triangular safe zone was identified at 110° of knee flexion. No neurovascular structures were pierced, and the IBSN was not present in the safe zone. At 90°, the IBSN was not pierced; however, the IBSN did violate the safe zone at 90° of knee flexion. Conclusion: The superior IBSN is at risk for iatrogenic injury with an AMP placed at 60° of knee flexion. The nerve moved distally with knee flexion. While no neurovascular structures were compromised at 90° of knee flexion, the nerve was found to course through the safe zone. A safe zone at 110° of knee flexion decreases the risk of neurovascular injury and makes the AMP safe for ACLR. Clinical Relevance: The AMP at 60° of knee flexion for ACLR poses risk to the IBSN. The IBSN did violate the safe zone at 90° of flexion. We recommend creating an AMP with increased knee flexion to 110° to decrease the risk of iatrogenic injury. When establishing an AMP, one should aim for the center of the defined safe zone, given that the spinal needle used in this study has a smaller diameter than a stab incision.

scholarly journals Combined Anatomic Anterior Cruciate Ligament and Double Bundle Anterolateral Ligament Reconstruction

2017 ◽  
Vol 6 (4) ◽  
pp. e1229-e1238 ◽  
Author(s):  
Assem Mohamed Noureldin Zein ◽  
Mohamed Elshafie ◽  
Ahmed Nady Saleh Elsaid ◽  
Mohamed Ahmed Elsaid Elrefai
Keyword(s):  
Anterior Cruciate Ligament ◽  
Ligament Reconstruction ◽  
Cruciate Ligament ◽  
Double Bundle ◽  
Anterolateral Ligament ◽  
Anterolateral Ligament Reconstruction ◽  
Anterior Cruciate

scholarly journals The effect of anterolateral ligament integrity on the tibia displacement and reaction forces of anterior cruciate ligament

2017 ◽  
Vol 5 (2_suppl2) ◽  
pp. 2325967117S0010
Author(s):  
Adem Aydın ◽  
Levent Uğur ◽  
Halil Atmaca
Keyword(s):  
Anterior Cruciate Ligament ◽  
Knee Joint ◽  
Internal Rotation ◽  
Knee Flexion ◽  
Cruciate Ligament ◽  
Anterolateral Ligament ◽  
Knee Flexion Angle ◽  
Anterior Drawer ◽  
Reaction Forces ◽  
Anterior Cruciate

Objective: Recent studies focused on rotational instability and remained positive pivot test in patients with anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction. Clinical, radiological and biomechanical studies showed the importance of the anterolateral ligament (ALL) integrity. ALL is one of the stabilization structures against the internal rotation of the tibia under forces which was associated with Segond fracture previously. Even some authors claimed that ACL failure and risk of re-rupture increased if only ACL reconstruction performed in patients with simultaneous ALL injury. The aim of the study is to evaluate the importance of ALL on knee biomechanics during anterior drawer test and internal rotation forces with different flexion angles in terms of reaction forces on ACL and the amount of tibia displacement via finite element analysis. Methods: Three dimensional (3D) solid model of knee joint and ALL injured models were constructed based on DICOM formatted computed tomography (CT) images. 0°, 15°,30°,45°,60°,75° and 90° flexion angles were applied respectively to reference models. Then varied anterior drawer and internal rotational forces were used to investigate the effect of ALL. ANSYS ®Version 17 was used in analyses and same boundary conditions were used in all models. Results: In critical analyzing the all results; medial displacement and the amount of anterior drawer distance were increased in all ALL injured models when compared with references. Therewithal the rotational displacements were increased by increasing the knee flexion angle and rotational torque. But, it was not a significant change in the amount of displacement between the models with respect to anteroposterior displacement when the anterior drawer force was increased. Conclusion: ALL particular has an important role in the stability of the internal rotation occurs against the force and with increased contribution rate to the knee joint stability by increasing the knee flexion angle. But the reaction forces were not affected by ALL integrity. So this study do not support the previous studies which suggest simultaneously reconstruction of both ligaments to avoid re rupture of ACL in cases with ALL injured.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document