Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy

, Volume 26, Issue 10, pp 3048–3054 | Cite as

Graft bending angle affects allograft tendon maturity early after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction

  • Linhai Chen
  • Yibing Wu
  • Guanghao Lin
  • Peng Wei
  • Zaohui Ye
  • Yangjian Wang
  • Tiantian Ren



The aim of this study was to clarify the association of the anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) graft bending angle and graft maturity of autograft and allograft tendons using high-resolution MRI.


Patients with unilateral ACL reconstruction were invited to participate in this study, and they were examined using a 3.0-T MRI scan at 3, 6 and 12 months after the operation. Anatomic single-bundle ACL reconstruction was performed on 48 patients using the trans-portal technique, including 28 with autograft hamstring tendons and 20 with allograft tendons. To evaluate graft healing, the signal/noise quotient (SNQ) was measured in four regions of interest (ROIs) of the femoral tunnel, proximal, midsubstance and distal ACL grafts. The graft bending angle was defined as the angle between the femoral bone tunnel and the line connecting the femoral and tibial tunnel apertures. Graft SNQ and graft bending angle were assessed at 3, 6 and 12 months postoperatively, and the association between SNQ and the average graft bending angle was analyzed.


Generally, the mean graft bending angle of this cohort increased gradually with time. The SNQ value of each graft region increased from 3 to 6 months and then decreased from 6 to 12 months. In the whole cohort, the graft bending angle had a significant positive association with graft SNQ in the femoral tunnel or proximal site. In the allograft subgroup, the graft bending angle had a significant positive association with the graft SNQ in the femoral tunnel or proximal site at 6 months after surgery, while there was no association between the graft bending angle and SNQ at 12 months. In the autograft subgroup, the graft bending angle had a significant positive association with graft SNQ in the femoral tunnel or proximal site at 12 months after surgery.


Generally, the graft bending angle was correlated with a high signal intensity of the proximal graft in the early postoperative period for allograft tendons and in the late postoperative period for allograft tendons. This suggests that the biomechanical effect from the graft bending angle on graft healing may be different for allografts and autografts after ACL reconstruction.

Level of evidence



MRI ACL Autograft Allograft SNQ Graft bending angle 



No funding.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors report no conflict of interest.

Ethical approval

The Health Sciences Institutional Review Board of our hospital approved this study (the Ethics Committee of Ningbo First Hospital, Approval number 2013-0110).


  1. 1.
    Ahn JH, Jeong HJ, Lee YS, Park JH, Lee JH, Ko TS (2016) Graft bending angle is correlated with femoral intraosseous graft signal intensity in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction using the outside-in technique. Knee 23:666–673CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Biercevicz AM, Miranda DL, Machan JT, Murray MM, Fleming BC (2013) In situ, noninvasive, T2*-weighted MRI-derived parameters predict ex vivo structural properties of an anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction or bioenhanced primary repair in a porcine model. Am J Sports Med 41:560–566CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Cavaignac E, Marot V, Faruch M, Reina N, Murgier J, Accadbled F, Berard E, Chiron P (2018) Hamstring graft incorporation according to the length of the graft inside tunnels. Am J Sports Med 46:348–356CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Chhabra A, Kline AJ, Nilles KM, Harner CD (2006) Tunnel expansion after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction with autogenous hamstrings: a comparison of the medial portal and transtibial techniques. Arthroscopy 22:1107–1112CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Figueroa D, Melean P, Calvo R, Vaisman A, Zilleruelo N, Figueroa F, Villalon I (2010) Magnetic resonance imaging evaluation of the integration and maturation of semitendinosus-gracilis graft in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction using autologous platelet concentrate. Arthroscopy 26:1318–1325CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Fleming BC, Proffen BL, Vavken P, Shalvoy MR, Machan JT, Murray MM (2015) Increased platelet concentration does not improve functional graft healing in bio-enhanced ACL reconstruction. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 23:1161–1170CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Fleming BC, Vajapeyam S, Connolly SA, Magarian EM, Murray MM (2011) The use of magnetic resonance imaging to predict ACL graft structural properties. J Biomech 44:2843–2846CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Fu SC, Cheng WH, Cheuk YC, Mok TY, Rolf CG, Yung SH, Chan KM (2013) Effect of graft tensioning on mechanical restoration in a rat model of anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction using free tendon graft. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 21:1226–1233CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Jang KM, Park SC, Lee DH (2016) Graft bending angle at the intra-articular femoral tunnel aperture after single-bundle posterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: inside-out versus outside-in techniques. Am J Sports Med 44:1269–1275CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Li H, Chen J, Li H, Wu Z, Chen S (2017) MRI-based ACL graft maturity does not predict clinical and functional outcomes during the first year after ACL reconstruction. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 25:3171–3178CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Li H, Chen S, Tao H, Li H, Chen S (2014) Correlation analysis of potential factors influencing graft maturity after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Orthop J Sports Med 2:2325967114553552CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Li H, Tao H, Cho S, Chen S, Yao Z, Chen S (2012) Difference in graft maturity of the reconstructed anterior cruciate ligament 2 years postoperatively: a comparison between autografts and allografts in young men using clinical and 3.0-T magnetic resonance imaging evaluation. Am J Sports Med 40:1519–1526CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Muramatsu K, Hachiya Y, Izawa H (2008) Serial evaluation of human anterior cruciate ligament grafts by contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging: comparison of allografts and autografts. Arthroscopy 24:1038–1044CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Natsu-ume T, Shino K, Nakata K, Nakamura N, Toritsuka Y, Mae T (2001) Endoscopic reconstruction of the anterior cruciate ligament with quadrupled hamstring tendons. A correlation between MRI changes and restored stability of the knee. J Bone Jt Surg Br 83:834–837CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Niki Y, Nagai K, Harato K, Suda Y, Nakamura M, Matsumoto M (2017) Effects of femoral bone tunnel characteristics on graft-bending angle in double-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a comparison of the outside-in and transportal techniques. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 25:1191–1198CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Nishimoto K, Kuroda R, Mizuno K, Hoshino Y, Nagamune K, Kubo S, Yagi M, Yamaguchi M, Yoshiya S, Kurosaka M (2009) Analysis of the graft bending angle at the femoral tunnel aperture in anatomic double bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a comparison of the transtibial and the far anteromedial portal technique. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 17:270–276CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Tashiro Y, Gale T, Sundaram V, Nagai K, Irrgang JJ, Anderst W, Nakashima Y, Tashman S, Fu FH (2017) The graft bending angle can affect early graft healing after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: in vivo analysis with 2 years’ follow-up. Am J Sports Med 45:1829–1836CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Tashiro Y, Irarrazaval S, Osaki K, Iwamoto Y, Fu FH (2017) Comparison of graft bending angle during knee motion after outside-in, trans-portal and trans-tibial anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 25:129–137CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Tashiro Y, Sundaram V, Thorhauer E, Gale T, Anderst W, Irrgang JJ, Fu FH, Tashman S (2017) In vivo analysis of dynamic graft bending angle in anterior cruciate ligament-reconstructed knees during downward running and level walking: comparison of flexible and rigid drills for transportal technique. Arthroscopy 33:1393–1402CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Tomihara T, Hashimoto Y, Taniuchi M, Shimada N (2015) Relationship between femoral tunnel location and graft bending angle in outside-in and transportal technique for ACL double bundle reconstruction in 3D-CT study. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 135:839–846CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Unterhauser FN, Bail HJ, Hoher J, Haas NP, Weiler A (2003) Endoligamentous revascularization of an anterior cruciate ligament graft. Clin Orthop Relat Res 414:276–288CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Wang JH, Kim JG, Lee DK, Lim HC, Ahn JH (2012) Comparison of femoral graft bending angle and tunnel length between transtibial technique and transportal technique in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 20:1584–1593CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Yoshikawa T, Tohyama H, Enomoto H, Matsumoto H, Toyama Y, Yasuda K (2006) Expression of vascular endothelial growth factor and angiogenesis in patellar tendon grafts in the early phase after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 14:804–810CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© European Society of Sports Traumatology, Knee Surgery, Arthroscopy (ESSKA) 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Linhai Chen
    • 1
  • Yibing Wu
    • 1
  • Guanghao Lin
    • 1
  • Peng Wei
    • 2
  • Zaohui Ye
    • 2
  • Yangjian Wang
    • 2
  • Tiantian Ren
    • 2
  1. 1.Medical collegeNingbo UniversityNingboPeople’s Republic of China
  2. 2.Department of Repair and Reconstruction SurgeryNingbo First hospitalNingboPeople’s Republic of China

Personalised recommendations