TITLE

Double Compared with Single-Bundle Open Inlay Posterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction in a Cadaver Model

AUTHOR(S)
Whiddon, David R.; Zehms, Chad T.; Miller, Mark D.; Quinby, J. Scott; Montgomery, Scott L.; Sekiya, Jon K.
PUB. DATE
September 2008
SOURCE
Journal of Bone & Joint Surgery, American Volume;Sep2008, Vol. 90-A Issue 9, p1820
SOURCE TYPE
Academic Journal
DOC. TYPE
Article
ABSTRACT
Background: There is considerable controversy regarding whether a double-bundle reconstruction of the posterior cruciate ligament is superior to single-bundle techniques. The purpose of this study was to compare posterior tibial translation and external rotation following double and single-bundle tibial inlay reconstruction of the posterior cruciate ligament in both a posterolateral corner-deficient and a repaired cadaver model. Methods: Posterior drawer testing, dial testing, and stress radiography were performed on nine cadaver knees. The intact knees served as controls. The posterior cruciate ligament and the posterolateral corner structures were resected, and each knee then underwent a double-bundle reconstruction of the posterior cruciate ligament. Following testing, both with and without the posterolateral corner repaired, the posteromedial bundle was released and the knee was retested with a single-bundle reconstruction. Results: With dial testing, external rotation measured a mean (and standard error) of 7.6° ± 0.4° at 30° of knee flexion and 9.0° ± 0.8° at 90° after the double-bundle reconstruction with posterolateral corner repair, and it measured 11.2° ± 1.4° at both 30° and 90° after the single-bundle reconstruction with posterolateral corner repair. When dial testing was performed after the double-bundle reconstruction without posterolateral corner repair, external rotation measured a mean of 15.8° ± 1.9° at 30° and 16.9° ± 2.0° at 90°; afterthe single-bundle reconstruction without posterolateral corner repair, it measured 20.1° ± 1.8° at 30° and 20.3° ± 1.7° at 90°. Without posterolateral corner repair, the double-bundle reconstruction permitted significantly less external rotation than did the single-bundle reconstruction at 30° (p = 0.03). Stress radiography showed the mean posterior displacement after the double-bundle reconstruction with posterolateral corner repair to be 3.3 ± 1.4 mm. This value was not significantly different from the mean posterior displacement of 4.8 ± 1.0 mm after the single-bundle reconstruction with posterolateral corner repair, and both values were similar to that for the intact control (2.9 ± 0.5 mm) (p = 0.254). However, the single-bundle reconstruction without posterolateral corner repair was associated with significantly increased posterior displacement when compared with the intact controls (p = 0.039) and with the double- bundle reconstruction without posterolateral corner repair (p = 0.026). Conclusions: Double-bundle reconstruction of the posterior cruciate ligament offers measurable benefits in terms of rotational stability and posterior translation in the setting of an untreated posterolateral corner injury. With the posterolateral corner intact, at time zero, the double-bundle reconstruction used in this study provided more rotational constraintto the knee at 30° and it did not further reduce posterior translation. Clinical Relevance: Corn pa red with single-bundle reconstruction, double-bundle reconstruction provided increased rotational and posterior control, which was most pronounced in the setting of an untreated posterolateral corner injury. This increased stability may be beneficial in the common clinical setting, in which these reconstructions tend to stretch over time. On the other hand, the persistence of the rotational overconstraint at 30° of knee flexion seen with the double-bundle reconstruction in this study may be a risk factor for osteoarthritis.
ACCESSION #
34230439

 

Related Articles

  • Is Long-Term Survivorship Really Significantly Better with Cruciate-Retaining Total Knee Implants? Engh, Gerard A. // Journal of Bone & Joint Surgery, American Volume;11/16/2011, Vol. 93-A Issue 22, pe136-1 

    In this article the author discusses aspects of the article "Increased Long-Term Survival of Posterior Cruciate-Retaining Versus Posterior Cruciate-Stabilizing Total Knee Replacements," by Matthew P. Abdel et al. The focus of the author's discussion is whether long-term survivorship is better...

  • Arthroscopic single-bundle posterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: retrospective review of hamstring tendon graft versus LARS artificial ligament. Li, Bin; Wen, Yu; Wu, Haishan; Qian, Qirong; Wu, Yuli; Lin, Xiangbo // International Orthopaedics;Aug2009, Vol. 33 Issue 4, p991 

    Our objective was to compare the results of reconstruction of isolated chronic posterior cruciate ligament (PCL) injury using a four-strand hamstring graft (4SHG) and a LARS artificial ligament. Thirty-six patients were divided into a 4SHG group ( n = 15) and a LARS group ( n = 21). The minimum...

  • Topography of the Femoral Attachment of the Posterior Cruciate Ligament. Forsythe, Brian; Harner, Christopher; Martins, Cesar A. Q.; Wei Shen; Lopes, Jr., Osmar V.; Fu, Freddie H. // Journal of Bone & Joint Surgery, American Volume;Mar2009 Supplement, Vol. 91-A, p89 

    BACKGROUND: The success of posterior cruciate ligament reconstruction has varied. The objective of this study was to determine quantitatively and qualitatively the topography and osseous landmarks of the femoral footprints of the anterolateral and posteromedial bundles of the posterior cruciate...

  • Morphology of the Tibial Insertion of the Posterior Cruciate Ligament. Tajima, Goro; Nozaki, Masahiro; Iriuchishima, Takanori; Ingham, Sheila J. M.; Wei Shen; Smolinski, Patrick; Fu, Freddie H. // Journal of Bone & Joint Surgery, American Volume;Apr2009, Vol. 91-A Issue 4, p859 

    Background: It has been demonstrated that double-bundle reconstruction of the posterior cruciate ligament restores knee kinematics better than does single-bundle reconstruction. The objective of this study was to identify the tibial insertion site of the posterior cruciate ligament and the...

  • Graft remodeling and ligamentization after cruciate ligament reconstruction. Scheffler, S.; Unterhauser, F.; Weiler, A. // Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy;Sep2008, Vol. 16 Issue 9, p834 

    After reconstruction of the cruciate ligaments, replacement grafts have to undergo several phases of healing in the intra-articular graft region and at the site of graft-to-bone incorporation. The changes in the biological and mechanical properties of the healing graft in its intra-articular...

  • Morphologic Changes of the Posterior Cruciate Ligament on Magnetic Resonance Imaging before and after Reconstruction of Chronic Anterior Cruciate Ligament Ruptures. Jae Doo Yoo; Hyung Mook Lim // Knee Surgery & Related Research;Dec2012, Vol. 24 Issue 4, p241 

    Purpose: The purpose of this study was to compare the morphologic change of the posterior cruciate ligament (PCL) on magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in chronic anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) tear before and after reconstruction. Materials and Methods: On the MRI image after ACL...

  • PCL repairs did not affect growth in pediatric, adolescent patients. Cantrell, Jason; Craven, Jeff // Orthopaedics Today Europe;2012, Vol. 15 Issue 5, p18 

    The article discusses a research study on the role and effects of posterior cruciate ligament (PCL) injury repairs and reconstruction as a multiligament treatment for pediatric and adolescent patients.

  • Consensus criteria for defining 'successful outcome' after ACL injury and reconstruction: a Delaware-Oslo ACL cohort investigation. Lynch, Andrew D.; Logerstedt, David S.; Grindem, Hege; Eitzen, Ingrid; Hicks, Gregory E.; Axe, Michael J.; Engebretsen, Lars; Risberg, May Arna; Snyder-Mackler, Lynn // British Journal of Sports Medicine;Mar2015, Vol. 49 Issue 5, p1 

    Background No gold standard exists for identifying successful outcomes 1 and 2 years after operative and non-operative management of anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injury. This limits the ability of a researcher and clinicians to compare and contrast the results of interventions. Purpose To...

  • PERSPECTIVE. Dodds, Julie A. // Orthopedics Today;Apr2011, Vol. 31 Issue 4, p44 

    The author comments on the approach used by Christopher D. Harner of the University of Pittsburgh Medical Center (UPMC) Center for Sports Medicine to manage posterior cruciate ligament (PCL) injuries by considering the anatomy and biomechanics of PCL.

Share

Read the Article

Courtesy of VIRGINIA BEACH PUBLIC LIBRARY AND SYSTEM

Sorry, but this item is not currently available from your library.

Try another library?
Sign out of this library

Other Topics