ACL-PCL and intercondylar notch impingement: magnetic resonance imaging of native and double-bundle ACL-reconstructed knees.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to: (1) define the relationship between the ACL and PCL in normal knees; (2) determine whether ACL-PCL impingement occurs in native knees; and (3) determine whether there is a difference in impingement between double-bundle reconstructed and native knees. METHODS: Eight subjects were identified (age 20-50; 6 females, 2 males). All were at least 1-year status postanatomic double-bundle ACL reconstruction (allograft; AM = 8 mm; PL = 7 mm) and had no history of injury or surgery to the contralateral knee. MRIs of both knees were performed with the knee at 0 and 30° of flexion. The images were evaluated by a non-treating surgeon and two musculoskeletal radiologists. Coronal and sagittal angles of AM and PL bundles, Liu's PCL index and the distance between ACL and PCL on modified axial oblique images were recorded. Impingement was graded (1) no contact; (2) contact without deformation; or (3) contact and distortion of PCL contour. RESULTS: Seventy-five percent (6) of the native ACL's showed no contact with the roof of the intercondylar notch or PCL, compared to 25 % (2) of the double-bundle reconstructed ACLs. One double-bundle reconstructed ACL showed intercondylar notch roof and ACL-PCL impingement (12.5 %). Significant differences were found between the native ACL and the double-bundle reconstructed ACL for the coronal angle of the AM (79° vs. 72°, p = 0.002) and PL bundle (75° vs. 58°, p = 0.001). No differences in ROM or stability were noted at any follow-up interval between groups based on MRI impingement grade. CONCLUSION: ACL-PCL contact occurred in 25 % of native knees. Contact between the ACL graft and PCL occurred in 75 % of double-bundle reconstructed knees. ACL-PCL impingement, both contact and distortion of the PCL, occurred in one knee after double-bundle reconstruction. This study offers perspective on what can be considered normal contact between the ACL and PCL and how impingement after ACL reconstruction can be detected on MRI. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Cohort Study, Level III.

Bone-patellar tendon-bone autograft versus hamstring autograft anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction in the young athlete: a retrospective matched analysis with 2-10 year follow-up.

PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to examine clinical and patient-reported outcomes as well as return to sport in athletes younger than 25 following ACL reconstruction with either bone-patellar tendon-bone (BTB) or hamstring (HS) autografts using a matched-pairs case-control experimental design. METHODS: Twenty-three matched pairs were obtained based on gender (57% women), age (18 ± 3 years BTB vs. 18 ± 3 HS), and length of follow-up (5 ± 2 years BTB vs. 4 ± 2 HS). Patients reported participating in very strenuous (soccer, basketball, etc.) or strenuous (skiing, tennis, etc.) sporting activity 4-7 times/week prior to their knee injury. Patient-reported outcomes included return to play data, the IKDC, SAS, ADLS, and SF-36 forms. Clinical outcomes included knee range of motion, laxity, and hop/jump testing. RESULTS: The majority of patients in both groups were able to participate in very strenuous or strenuous sporting activity 4-7 times per week following surgery [17 (74%) BTB vs. 16 (70%) HS]. However, only 13 (57%) of the BTB subjects and 10 (44%) of the HS patients were able to return to pre-injury activity levels (P = n.s.). HS patients showed higher ADLS (P < 0.01) and SAS (P < 0.01) scores, better restoration of extension (P < 0.05), and less radiographic evidence of osteoarthritis (P < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Hamstring and bone-patellar tendon-bone autografts allow approximately 70% of young athletes to return to some degree of strenuous or very strenuous sporting activity, while only approximately half of patients were able to return to their pre-injury sporting activity level. Hamstring grafts lead to better preservation of extension, higher patient-reported outcome scores, and less radiographic evidence of osteoarthritis. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic (case-control study) Level III.

Factors that influence the intra-articular rupture pattern of the ACL graft following single-bundle reconstruction.

PURPOSES: The number of revision anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) surgeries performed annually continues to rise. The purpose of this study was to determine the most common rupture pattern in ACL revision cases after previous single-bundle reconstruction. The second aim was to determine the relationship between rupture pattern and patient-specific factors (age, gender, time between the initial ACL reconstruction and re-injury, and etiology/mechanism of failure) and surgical factors (graft type, tunnel angle). METHODS: This was a cohort study of 60 patients that underwent revision ACL surgery after previous single-bundle ACL reconstruction. Three sports medicine-trained orthopedic surgeons reviewed the arthroscopic videos and determined the rupture pattern of the grafts. The rupture pattern was then correlated to the above-mentioned factors. RESULTS: The inter-observer agreement had a kappa of 0.7. The most common rupture pattern after previous single-bundle ACL reconstruction is elongation of the graft. This is different from the native ACL, which displays more proximal ruptures. With the use of autograft tissue and after a longer period of time, the rupture pattern in revision surgery is more similar to that of the native ACL. CONCLUSION: The most common rupture pattern after previous single-bundle reconstruction was elongation of the graft. Factors that influenced the rupture pattern were months between ACL reconstruction and re-injury and graft type. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Cohort study, Level IV.

ACL graft re-rupture after double-bundle reconstruction: factors that influence the intra-articular pattern of injury.

PURPOSE: To determine the most common rupture patterns of previously reconstructed DB-ACL cases, seen at the time of revision surgery, and to determine the influence of age, gender, time between the initial ACL reconstruction and re-injury, tunnel angle and etiology of failure. METHODS: Forty patients who presented for revision surgery after previous double-bundle ACL reconstruction were enrolled. Three orthopedic surgeons independently reviewed the arthroscopic videos and determined the rupture pattern of both the anteromedial and posterolateral grafts. The graft rupture pattern was then correlated with the previously mentioned factors. RESULTS: The most common injury pattern seen at the time of revision ACL surgery was mid-substance AM and PL bundle rupture. Factors that influenced the rupture pattern (proximal vs. mid-substance and distal rupture vs. elongated, but in continuity) were months between ACL reconstruction and re-injury (P = 0.002), the etiology of failure (traumatic vs. atraumatic) (P = 0.025) and the measured graft tunnel angle (P = 0.048). CONCLUSIONS: The most common pattern of graft re-rupture was mid-substance AM and mid-substance PL. As the length of time from the initial DB-ACL reconstruction to revision surgery increased, the pattern of injury more closely resembled that of the native ACL. Evaluation of patients who have undergone double-bundle ACL reconstruction, with a particular focus on graft maturity, mechanism of injury and femoral tunnel angles, and graft rupture pattern assists in preoperative planning for revision surgery.

Does the lateral intercondylar ridge disappear in ACL deficient patients?

The aim of this study was to determine whether there is a difference in the presence of the lateral intercondylar ridge and the lateral bifurcate ridge between patients with sub-acute and chronic ACL injuries. We hypothesized that the ridges would be present less often with chronic ACL deficiency. Twenty-five patients with a chronic ACL injury were matched for age and gender to 25 patients with a sub-acute ACL injury. The lateral intercondylar ridge and lateral bifurcate ridge were scored as either present, absent, or indeterminate due to insufficient visualization by three blinded observers. The kappa for the three observers was .61 for the lateral intercondylar ridge and .58 for the lateral bifurcate ridge. The lateral intercondylar ridge was present in 88% of the sub-acute patients and 88% of the chronic patients. The lateral bifurcate ridge was present in 48% of the sub-acute and 48% of the chronic patients. This matched-pairs case-control study was unable to show a difference in the presence of the femoral bony ridges between patients with acute and chronic ACL injuries. The authors would suggest looking for the ridges as a landmark of the native ACL insertion site during ACL reconstruction in both acute and chronic ACL injuries.

Osteoarticular allograft transplantation for large humeral head defects in glenohumeral instability.

During traumatic anterior shoulder dislocation, significant derangement of normal anatomy occurs. Open and arthroscopic techniques alike have emphasized anatomic reconstruction of anterior capsulolabral structures while often neglecting associated osteoarticular pathology. Recent studies have shown that failure rates after Bankart repair are dramatically higher in the presence of large glenohumeral bone defects, yet little has been written about how to best address these lesions. Historically, these patients will undergo multiple procedures culminating with nonanatomic solutions to constrain the humeral head (coracoid transfer or open capsular shift). Significant loss of motion yields unacceptable results in a high-demand athletic population. We present a new approach to athletic, highly functional patients with recurrent anterior instability and large humeral head defects (Hill-Sachs lesion). Anterior capsulolabral pathology is addressed arthroscopically, and the Hill-Sachs lesion is then addressed via a limited posterior approach to the humeral head. Osteoarticular allograft transplantation is performed by use of a single plug to fill the defect. As described, this procedure can be performed in a single operative setting or as a staged procedure for those patients who still have subjective subluxation as a result of continued engagement of a large humeral head defect after Bankart repair. Importantly, our posterior approach does not require takedown of the anterior capsulolabral repair to address the bone defect. We have performed this procedure in a 19-year-old enlisted US Navy seaman, with excellent short-term results. At 1-year of follow-up, he has returned to full active military duty without restriction.

Arthroscopic shoulder stabilization: is there ever a need to open?

Recent studies show comparable results of arthroscopic shoulder stabilization techniques compared with the gold standard open Bankart reconstruction. Great technical advances and ever-increasing surgeon experience have rendered pathology once deemed an indication for open surgery as treatable by arthroscopic means. With this movement toward a more universal application of all-arthroscopic techniques, we might consider the following question: Is there ever a need to open? To answer this question, we must first consider normal anatomy and then appreciate the contribution of deranged pathoanatomy to recurrent instability in each individual case. The surgeon must then determine whether this is best addressed via an arthroscopic or open technique. Arthroscopy, as compared with open stabilization procedures, holds the potential benefits of decreased morbidity rates, early functional rehabilitation, and improved range of motion. Despite potential advantages, arthroscopic stabilization is clearly contraindicated when a significant pathologic lesion contributing to recurrent instability cannot be adequately addressed as a result of the limitations of current techniques or instrumentation. On the basis of this principle, we believe that sizable glenohumeral bone defects remain the only absolute contraindication to an all-arthroscopic approach. Many complicating issues, such as attenuated capsule, humeral avulsion of the glenohumeral ligament lesions, cases of revision surgery, and collision or contact athletes, exist and warrant close attention. We prefer to think of these situations as "challenges" for which both arthroscopic and open surgery should be considered, rather than as true contraindications to arthroscopic shoulder stabilization. We are, by no means, advocating arthroscopic treatment in all cases of shoulder instability, because this would represent a gross oversimplification of the issues at hand. However, we do acknowledge that the steadfast contraindications to arthroscopic shoulder stabilization are decreasing every day.

Arthroscopic Double-Row Suture Anchor Repair of Acute Posterior Bony Bankart Lesion.

The treatment of anterior shoulder instability is well described with various techniques, including arthroscopic double-row repair, an alternative to open stabilization procedures in high-risk groups. The surgical management of posterior instability in high-risk and athletic populations is a less-explored entity. We describe our technique for an all arthroscopic double-row suture anchor repair of a large posterior bony Bankart lesion. We prefer this technique over percutaneous cannulated screw fixation because the double-row suture technique allows for incorporation of capsular plication with bony fixation in an effort to better restore normal anatomy for capsulolabral complex. Double-row repair capsulolabral repair or fixation of the bony Bankart is performed via a suture-bridge technique. Medial row anchors are placed down the glenoid neck and shuttled around the bony fragment and labrum. The lateral-row anchor is placed at the rim of the native glenoid. This repair technique has been shown to increase the surface area for healing and more closely reconstruct the native anatomic capsulolabral complex footprint, improve force distribution, and potentially impart enhanced posterior stability to the glenohumeral joint.

Unrecognized osteoid osteoma of the proximal femur with associated cam impingement.

Femoro-acetabular impingement is a common cause of hip pain in young athletes. Evaluation typically includes radiographs and magnetic resonance imaging. It is important to appreciate uncommon diagnoses and the role of complimentary imaging. This clinical vignette emphasizes the need complete imaging with CT in select case of atypical hip pain. We present a 19-year old soccer player who underwent seemingly successful arthroscopic FAI surgery but returned with pain. Computed tomography (CT) revealed osteoid osteoma of the lesser trochanter. The lesion was successfully treated with percutaneous CT guided radiofrequency ablation.

O conceito da reconstrução anatômica do LCA dupla banda / The concept of anatomic anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction

Um interesse cada vez maior na reconstrução dupla banda do LCA tem estimulado um grande avanço nesta área de pesquisa e levado a um aumento no nosso conhecimento de anatomia, cinemática e função do joelho. Estudos recentes têm melhor definido o tamanho e orientação das inserções femorais e tibiais das bandas ântero-medial e póstero-lateral do LCA. O objetivo da reconstrução anatômica do LCA é utilizar esses novos conceitos para melhorar a técnica cirúrgica e mimetizar a anatomia original do LCA. Acreditamos que a reconstrução anatômica do LCA irá resultar em uma melhora na biomecânica e, consequentemente, uma melhora no quadro funcional de cada paciente.