PDF herunterladen
J Knee Surg 2020; 33(11): 1147-1151
DOI: 10.1055/s-0039-1692648
Original Article

Hamstring Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction Using an Adjustable-Loop Cortical Suspension Device: Immediate Postoperative Magnetic Resonance Imaging

Nam-Hong Choi
1   Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Eulji Medical Center, Seoul, Korea
,
Seung-Joo Lee
1   Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Eulji Medical Center, Seoul, Korea
,
Whang-Kyun Oh
1   Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Eulji Medical Center, Seoul, Korea
,
Brian N. Victoroff
2   Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio
› Institutsangaben
› Weitere Informationen
    Lizenzen und Reprints

Abstract

The purpose of this study is to determine whether the hamstring grafts are fully inserted into the femoral tunnel with the adjustable loop using immediate postoperative magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) after anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstructions. A total of 62 consecutive patients underwent hamstring ACL reconstruction using an adjustable-loop cortical suspension device for the femoral fixation and the Intrafix sheath and screw for the tibial fixation. Multiplanar reformatted images of 3-T MRI scans were obtained at the 1st postoperative day before weight bearing is initiated in all patients to evaluate the gap (the tunnel–graft gap) between the top of the hamstring graft and top of the femoral tunnel. Postoperative MRI scans showed that the tunnel–graft gap was 1.5 ± 2.7 mm (range, 0–12 mm). In 43 (69.4%) patients, there was no gap between the top of the femoral tunnel and hamstring graft. In 19 (30.6%) patients, there was a gap between the tunnel and graft, and nine patients demonstrated a tunnel–graft gap greater than 5 mm. Immediate postoperative MRI scans demonstrated that an adjustable-loop cortical suspension device may not pull the hamstring graft completely into the femoral tunnel.

Keywords

hamstring graft - femoral tunnel - adjustable loop - MRI


Publikationsverlauf

Eingereicht: 18. Oktober 2018

Angenommen: 05. Mai 2019

Artikel online veröffentlicht:
03. Juli 2019

Thieme Medical Publishers
333 Seventh Avenue, New York, NY 10001, USA.

 

  • References

  • 1 Chechik O, Amar E, Khashan M, Lador R, Eyal G, Gold A. An international survey on anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction practices. Int Orthop 2013; 37 (02) 201-206
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Kamelger FS, Onder U, Schmoelz W, Tecklenburg K, Arora R, Fink C. Suspensory fixation of grafts in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a biomechanical comparison of 3 implants. Arthroscopy 2009; 25 (07) 767-776
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Höher J, Möller HD, Fu FH. Bone tunnel enlargement after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: fact or fiction?. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 1998; 6 (04) 231-240
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Baumfeld JA, Diduch DR, Rubino LJ. et al. Tunnel widening following anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction using hamstring autograft: a comparison between double cross-pin and suspensory graft fixation. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 2008; 16 (12) 1108-1113
    Google Scholar
  • 5 Buelow JU, Siebold R, Ellermann A. A prospective evaluation of tunnel enlargement in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction with hamstrings: extracortical versus anatomical fixation. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 2002; 10 (02) 80-85
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Fauno P, Kaalund S. Tunnel widening after hamstring anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction is influenced by the type of graft fixation used: a prospective randomized study. Arthroscopy 2005; 21 (11) 1337-1341
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Eguchi A, Ochi M, Adachi N, Deie M, Nakamae A, Usman MA. Mechanical properties of suspensory fixation devices for anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: comparison of the fixed-length loop device versus the adjustable-length loop device. Knee 2014; 21 (03) 743-748
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Petre BM, Smith SD, Jansson KS. et al. Femoral cortical suspension devices for soft tissue anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a comparative biomechanical study. Am J Sports Med 2013; 41 (02) 416-422
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Barrow AE, Pilia M, Guda T, Kadrmas WR, Burns TC. Femoral suspension devices for anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: do adjustable loops lengthen?. Am J Sports Med 2014; 42 (02) 343-349
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Firat A, Catma F, Tunc B. et al. The attic of the femoral tunnel in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a comparison of outcomes of two suspensory femoral fixation systems. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 2014; 22 (05) 1097-1105
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Choi NH, Yang BS, Victoroff BN. Clinical and radiological outcomes after hamstring anterior cruciate ligament reconstructions: comparison between fixed-loop and adjustable-loop cortical suspension devices. Am J Sports Med 2017; 45 (04) 826-831
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Zehir S, Zehir R. Suspensory fixation versus novel transverse crosspin for femoral fixation in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 2014; 134 (11) 1579-1585
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Boyle MJ, Vovos TJ, Walker CG, Stabile KJ, Roth JM, Garrett Jr WE. Does adjustable-loop femoral cortical suspension loosen after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction? A retrospective comparative study. Knee 2015; 22 (04) 304-308
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Wise BT, Patel NN, Wier G, Labib SA. Outcomes of ACL reconstruction with fixed versus variable loop button fixation. Orthopedics 2017; 40 (02) e275-e280
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar