Avoiding tibia physeal injury during double-bundle posterior cruciate ligament reconstruction

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.

2016 ◽  
Vol 30 (06) ◽  
pp. 523-531 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jeffrey Milles ◽  
Ferris Pfeiffer ◽  
James Stannard ◽  
Patrick Smith ◽  
Mauricio Kfuri ◽  
...  

AbstractNo surgical technique recreates native posterior cruciate ligament (PCL) biomechanics. We compared the biomechanics of five different PCL reconstruction techniques versus the native PCL. Cadaveric knees (n = 20) were randomly assigned to one of five reconstruction techniques: Single bundle all-inside arthroscopic inlay, single bundle all-inside suspensory fixation, single bundle arthroscopic-assisted open onlay (SB-ONL), double bundle arthroscopic-assisted open inlay (DB-INL), and double bundle all-inside suspensory fixation (DB-SUSP). Each specimen was potted and connected to a servo-hydraulic load frame for testing in three conditions: PCL intact, PCL deficient, and PCL reconstructed. Testing consisted of a posterior force up to 100 N at a rate of 1 N/s at four knee flexion angles: 10, 30, 60, and 90 degrees. Three material properties were measured under each condition: load to 5 mm displacement, maximal displacement, and stiffness. Data were normalized to the native PCL, compared across techniques, compared with all PCL-intact knees and to all PCL-deficient knees using one-way analysis of variance. For load to 5 mm displacement, intact knees required significantly (p < 0.03) more load at 30 degrees of flexion than all reconstructions except the DB-SUSP. At 60 degrees of flexion, intact required significantly (p < 0.01) more load than all others except the SB-ONL. At 90 degrees, intact, SB-ONL, DB-INL, and DB-SUSP required significantly more load (p < 0.05). Maximal displacement testing showed the intact to have significantly (p < 0.02) less laxity than all others except the DB-INL and DB-SUSP at 60 degrees. At 90 degrees the intact showed significantly (p < 0.01) less laxity than all others except the DB-SUSP. The intact was significantly stiffer than all others at 30 degrees (p < 0.03) and 60 degrees (p < 0.01). Finally, the intact was significantly (p < 0.05) stiffer than all others except the DB-SUSP at 90 degrees. No technique matched the exact properties of the native PCL, but the double bundle reconstructions more closely recreated the native biomechanics immediately after implantation, with the DB-SUSP coming closest to the native ligament. This study contributes new data for consideration in PCL reconstruction technique choice.


2020 ◽  
Vol 8 (8) ◽  
pp. 232596712092395
Author(s):  
Yipeng Lin ◽  
Zeyuan Huang ◽  
Kaibo Zhang ◽  
Xuelin Pan ◽  
Xihao Huang ◽  
...  

Background: The “killer turn” effect after posterior cruciate ligament (PCL) reconstruction is a problem that can lead to graft laxity or failure. Solutions for this situation are currently lacking. Purpose: To evaluate the clinical outcomes of a modified procedure for PCL reconstruction and quantify the killer turn using 3-dimensional (3D) computed tomography (CT). Study design: Case series; Level of evidence, 4. Methods: A total of 15 patients underwent modified PCL reconstruction with the tibial aperture below the center of the PCL footprint. Next, 2 virtual tibial tunnels with anatomic and proximal tibial apertures were created on 3D CT. All patients were assessed according to the Lysholm score, International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) Subjective Knee Evaluation Form, Tegner score, side-to-side difference (SSD) in tibial posterior translation using stress radiography, and 3D gait analysis. Results: The modified tibial tunnel showed 2 significantly gentler turns (superior, 109.87° ± 10.12°; inferior, 151.25° ± 9.07°) compared with those reconstructed with anatomic (91.33° ± 7.28°; P < .001 for both comparisons) and proximal (99° ± 7.92°; P = .023 and P < .001, respectively) tibial apertures. The distance from the footprint to the tibial aperture was 16.49 ± 3.73 mm. All patient-reported outcome scores (mean ± SD) improved from pre- to postoperatively: Lysholm score, from 46.4 ± 18.87 to 83.47 ± 10.54 ( P < .001); Tegner score, from 2.47 ± 1.85 to 6.07 ± 1.58 ( P < .001); IKDC sports activities score, from 19 ± 9.90 to 33.07 ± 5.35 ( P < .001); and IKDC knee symptoms score, from 17.87 ± 6.31 to 25.67 ± 3.66 ( P < .001). The mean SSD improved from 9.15 ± 2.27 mm preoperatively to 4.20 ± 2.31 mm postoperatively ( P < .001). The reconstructed knee showed significantly more adduction (by 1.642°), less flexion (by 1.285°), and more lateral translation (by 0.279 mm) than that of the intact knee ( P < .001 for all). Conclusion: Lowering the tibial aperture during PCL reconstruction reduced the killer turn, and the clinical outcomes remained satisfactory. However, SSD and clinical outcomes were similar to those of previously described techniques using an anatomic tibial tunnel.


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.


2019 ◽  
Vol 7 (11_suppl6) ◽  
pp. 2325967119S0047
Author(s):  
Andri Lubis ◽  
Mohamad Walid Kuncoro

Objectives: Posterior cruciate ligament (PCL) reconstruction failure is a rare condition found. The failure caused by some factors, including improper graft tunnel placement. The proper tibial tunnel placement in PCL reconstruction is still controversial. To have an anatomical tunnel is essential to decrease the risk of failure. The use of PCL jig only to guide the direction of the tibial tunnel may not always give good results. Case presentation: We report a case of a 29-year-old male with a total rupture of ACL and PCL that underwent reconstruction for both ligaments. We found the failure of the PCL graft 2 years after the surgery was related to the tibial tunnel placement which was placed not in proper anatomical site. We performed revision PCL surgery with a transseptal portal technique to ensure the tibial tunnel is placed inappropriate position. Result: The cause of failure was associated with the miss position of the tibial tunnel. The tibial tunnel performed in previous surgery was too anterior than the anatomical footprint. This condition might be caused by a surgical technique that depending only on PCL jig to guide the tibial tunnel direction and location. We performed a transseptal portal technique to get better visualization on the posterior aspect of the knee to achieve the proper direction of the tibial tunnel. Conclusion: The use of PCL jig as the only tool for guiding tibial tunneling should be avoided. An additional tool such as a transseptal portal is required to ensure the proper anatomical tibial tunnel to achieve good PCL graft placement.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document