Advertisement

Archives of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery

, Volume 138, Issue 9, pp 1249–1255 | Cite as

No difference in the graft shift between a round and a rounded rectangular femoral tunnel for anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: an experimental study

  • Yasushi Takata
  • Junsuke Nakase
  • Takeshi Oshima
  • Kengo Shimozaki
  • Kazuki Asai
  • Hiroyuki Tsuchiya
Arthroscopy and Sports Medicine

Abstract

Introduction

We developed a novel technique of creating a rounded rectangular femoral bone tunnel for anatomical, single-bundle, autologous hamstring tendon anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction. Although this tunnel has many advantages, its non-circular shape has raised concerns regarding excessive graft shift within the bone tunnel. This study aimed to compare the graft shift between round and rounded rectangular tunnels using a graft diameter tester for simulating the femoral bone tunnel.

Materials and methods

Seven semitendinosus tendon grafts harvested from fresh-frozen cadavers were prepared by removing all excess soft tissue. The two ends of a double-fold hamstring tendon were sutured using a baseball stitch and then looped over a TightRope (Arthrex Co., Ltd., Naples, Florida, USA) to make a fourfold graft. The diameter of the graft was standardized to 8 mm using a round graft diameter tester. A round and an original rounded rectangular graft diameter tester were used for simulating the respective femoral bone tunnels. The graft was inserted into the tunnel, with the TightRope positioned on the outside of the tunnel. The distal end of the graft was tensioned to 40 N at an angle of 75° to reproduce the most severe graft bending angle. Digital photographs of the tunnel aperture taken at each simulated tunnel and the range of graft shift in the simulated tunnel were analyzed by ImageJ software. Statistical analyses were performed using the Tukey test. P < 0.05 was considered to be significant.

Results

There were no significant differences between the round and the rounded rectangular tunnel groups (P > 0.05) in terms of graft shift, gap area, and graft shift ratio.

Conclusion

In a simulated ACL reconstruction, there is no difference in the graft shift between a round and a rounded rectangular bone tunnel.

Keywords

ACL reconstruction Rounded rectangular femoral bone tunnel Graft shift Hamstring graft 

Notes

Funding

There is no funding source.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical approval

This article does not contain any studies with human participants or animals performed by any of the authors.

References

  1. 1.
    Kamath GV, Redfern JC, Greis PE, Burks RT (2011) Revision anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Am J Sports Med 39:199–217CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Marchant B, Noyes F, Barber-Westin S, Fleckenstein C (2010) Prevalence of nonanatomical graft placement in a series of failed anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Am J Sports Med 38:1987–1996CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Sasaki N, Ishibashi Y, Tsuda E, Yamamoto Y, Maeda S, Mizukami H, Toh S, Yagihashi S, Tonosaki Y (2012) The femoral insertion of the anterior cruciate ligament: discrepancy between macroscopic and histological observations. Arthroscopy 28:1135–1146CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Smigielski R, Zdanowicz U, Drwięga M, Ciszek B, Ciszkowska-Łysoń B, Siebold R (2015) Ribbon like appearance of the midsubstance fibres of the anterior cruciate ligament close to its femoral insertion site: a cadaveric study including 111 knees. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 23:3143–3150CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Siebold R (2015) Flat ACL anatomy: fact no fiction. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 23:3133–3135CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Petersen W, Zantop T (2007) Anatomy of the anterior cruciate ligament with regard to its two bundles. Clin Orthop Relat Res 454:35–47CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Suruga M, Horaguchi T, Iriuchishima T, Yahagi Y, Iwama G, Tokuhashi Y, Aizawa S (2017) Morphological size evaluation of the mid-substance insertion areas and the fan-like extension fibers in the femoral ACL footprint. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 137:1107–1113CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Oshima T, Nakase J, Numata H, Takata Y, Tsuchiya H (2016) The cross-sectional shape of the fourfold semitendinosus tendon is oval, not round. J Exp Orthop 3:28CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Nakase J, Toratani T, Kosaka M, Ohashi Y, Numata H, Oshima T, Takata Y, Tsuchiya H (2016) Technique of anatomical single bundle ACL reconstruction with rounded rectangle femoral dilator. Knee 23:91–96CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Araki D, Kuroda R, Matsumoto T, Nagamune K, Matsushita T, Hoshino Y, Oka S, Nishizawa Y, Kurosaka M (2014) Three-dimensional analysis of bone tunnel changes after anatomic double-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction using multidetector-row computed tomography. Am J Sports Med 42:2234–2241CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Fujii M, Sasaki Y, Araki D, Furumatsu T, Miyazawa S, Ozaki T, Linde-Rosen M, Smolinski P, Fu FH (2016) Evaluation of the semitendinosus tendon graft shift in the bone tunnel: an experimental study. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 24:2773–2777CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Nawabi DH, Tucker S, Schafer KA, Zuiderbaan HA, Nguyen JT, Wickiewicz TL, Imhauser CW, Pearle AD (2016) ACL fibers near the lateral intercondylar ridge are the most Load bearing during stability examinations and isometric through passive flexion. Am J Sports Med 44:2563–2571CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Wilson TC, Kantaras A, Atay A, Johnson DL (2004) Tunnel enlargement after anterior cruciate ligament surgery. Am J Sports Med 32:543–549CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    L’Insalata JC, Klatt B, Fu FH, Harner CD (1997) Tunnel expansion following anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a comparison of hamstring and patellar tendon autografts. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 5:234–238CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Ho¨her J, Mo¨ller HD, Fu FH (1998) Bone tunnel enlargement after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: fact or fiction? Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 6:231–240CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Vergis A, Gilquist J (1995) Graft failure in intra-articular anterior cruciate ligament reconstructions: a review of the literature. Arthroscopy 11:312–321CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Gokce A, Beyzadeoglu T, Ozyer F, Bekler H, Erdogan F (2009) Does bone impaction technique reduce tunnel enlargement in ACL reconstruction? Int Orthop 33:407–412CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Taketomi S, Inui H, Tahara K, Shirakawa N, Tanaka S, Nakagawa T (2017) Effects of initial graft tension on femoral tunnel widening after anatomic anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction using a bone-patellar tendon-bone graft. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 137:1285–1291CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Takata Y, Nakase J, Numata H, Oshima T, Tsuchiya H (2016) Computed tomography value and tunnel enlargement of round and rounded rectangular femoral bone tunnel for anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 136:1587–1594CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Shino K, Suzuki T, Iwahashi T, Mae T, Nakamura N, Nakata K, Nakagawa S (2010) The resident’s ridge as an arthroscopic landmark for anatomical femoral tunnel drilling in ACL reconstruction. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 18:1164–1168CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Mariscalco MW, Flanigan DC, Mitchell J, Pedroza AD, Jones MH, Andrish JT, Parker RD, Kaeding CC, Magnussen RA (2013) The influence of hamstring autograft size on patient-reported outcomes and risk of revision after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a Multicenter Orthopaedic Outcomes Network (MOON) Cohort Study. Arthroscopy 29:1948–1953CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Conte EJ, Hyatt AE, Gatt CJ Jr, Dhawan A (2014) Hamstring autograft size can be predicted and is a potential risk factor for anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction failure. Arthroscopy 30:882–890CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Lee BH, Bansal S, Park SH, Wang JH (2015) Eccentric graft positioning within the femoral tunnel aperture in anatomic double-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction using the transportal and outside-in techniques. Am J Sports Med 43:1180–1188CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Dargel J, Gotter M, Mader K, Pennig D, Koebke J, Schmidt-Wiethoff R (2007) Biomechanics of the anterior cruciate ligament and implications for surgical reconstruction. Strateg Trauma Limb Reconstr 2:1–12CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Rachmat HH, Janssen D, Verkerke GJ, Diercks RL, Verdonschot N (2016) In-situ mechanical behavior and slackness of the anterior cruciate ligament at multiple knee flexion angles. Med Eng Phys 38:209–215CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Yasushi Takata
    • 1
  • Junsuke Nakase
    • 1
  • Takeshi Oshima
    • 1
  • Kengo Shimozaki
    • 1
  • Kazuki Asai
    • 1
  • Hiroyuki Tsuchiya
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Orthopaedic SurgeryGraduate School of Medical Science Kanazawa UniversityKanazawaJapan

Personalised recommendations