Inside-out tibial tunnel drilling technique is a reliable approach for all-inside ACL reconstruction: A longitudinal MRI assessment

IF 2 Q2 ORTHOPEDICS Journal of Experimental Orthopaedics Pub Date : 2024-11-10 DOI:10.1002/jeo2.70068
João Pedro Oliveira, Otília C. d'Almeida, Ricardo Sampaio, José Carlos Noronha
{"title":"Inside-out tibial tunnel drilling technique is a reliable approach for all-inside ACL reconstruction: A longitudinal MRI assessment","authors":"João Pedro Oliveira,&nbsp;Otília C. d'Almeida,&nbsp;Ricardo Sampaio,&nbsp;José Carlos Noronha","doi":"10.1002/jeo2.70068","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Purpose</h3>\n \n <p>To longitudinally evaluate sockets localization, tunnel morphological changes and graft maturation after the <i>inside-out tibial tunnel drilling technique for all-inside Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction (ACLR)</i>. We hypothesized that due the necessary angle for the inside-out reaming procedure, the described technique could input changes in the tibial socket.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Methods</h3>\n \n <p>Fourteen knees treated with the same all-inside ACLR technique were randomly assigned for a magnetic resonance evaluation. All patients were operated by the same surgeon and performed the same follow-up rehabilitation protocol. Socket's localization, shape and widening, as well as graft maturation and integration, were evaluated intraoperatively at 6 months and 4 years after surgery.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>Both femoral and tibial tunnels had an expected increase at 6 months follow-up. The widening was larger in the tibial tunnel (12.6 ± 10.0% vs. 9.1 ± 8.5%), yet this difference was not statistically different. Tibial tunnel was well centred in the tibial plateau and the integration of the graft was higher in the tibial socket. Four years after surgery, there was a general reduction of diameter in both tunnels. The tunnel occlusion rate was 33.3% for tibia and 16.7% for femur.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusions</h3>\n \n <p>Overall, our results show that within a 4-year follow-up period, the <i>inside-out tibial tunnel drilling technique for all-inside ACLR</i> represents a safe technique that did not influence the tibial socket position nor tunnel widening or graft maturation in the long term.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Level of Evidence</h3>\n \n <p>Level IV.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":36909,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Experimental Orthopaedics","volume":"11 4","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11551069/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Experimental Orthopaedics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/jeo2.70068","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose

To longitudinally evaluate sockets localization, tunnel morphological changes and graft maturation after the inside-out tibial tunnel drilling technique for all-inside Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction (ACLR). We hypothesized that due the necessary angle for the inside-out reaming procedure, the described technique could input changes in the tibial socket.

Methods

Fourteen knees treated with the same all-inside ACLR technique were randomly assigned for a magnetic resonance evaluation. All patients were operated by the same surgeon and performed the same follow-up rehabilitation protocol. Socket's localization, shape and widening, as well as graft maturation and integration, were evaluated intraoperatively at 6 months and 4 years after surgery.

Results

Both femoral and tibial tunnels had an expected increase at 6 months follow-up. The widening was larger in the tibial tunnel (12.6 ± 10.0% vs. 9.1 ± 8.5%), yet this difference was not statistically different. Tibial tunnel was well centred in the tibial plateau and the integration of the graft was higher in the tibial socket. Four years after surgery, there was a general reduction of diameter in both tunnels. The tunnel occlusion rate was 33.3% for tibia and 16.7% for femur.

Conclusions

Overall, our results show that within a 4-year follow-up period, the inside-out tibial tunnel drilling technique for all-inside ACLR represents a safe technique that did not influence the tibial socket position nor tunnel widening or graft maturation in the long term.

Level of Evidence

Level IV.

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
胫骨内侧隧道钻孔技术是全内侧前交叉韧带重建的可靠方法:核磁共振成像纵向评估
目的:纵向评估全内侧前交叉韧带重建术(ACLR)中胫骨隧道内向外钻孔技术后的关节窝定位、隧道形态变化和移植物成熟度。我们假设,由于内向外扩孔手术需要一定的角度,所述技术可能会导致胫骨窝发生变化:方法:我们随机分配了 14 个采用相同的全内侧 ACLR 技术治疗的膝关节进行磁共振评估。所有患者均由同一外科医生进行手术,并执行相同的后续康复方案。分别在术后6个月和4年对韧带臼的定位、形状和增宽以及移植物的成熟和整合情况进行术中评估:结果:股骨和胫骨隧道在术后 6 个月时都出现了预期的增大。胫骨隧道的增宽更大(12.6 ± 10.0% 对 9.1 ± 8.5%),但这一差异在统计学上没有差异。胫骨隧道在胫骨平台的中心位置良好,移植物在胫骨窝的整合度较高。术后四年,两条隧道的直径普遍缩小。胫骨隧道闭塞率为33.3%,股骨隧道闭塞率为16.7%:总之,我们的研究结果表明,在4年的随访期内,用于全内交叉韧带置换术的胫骨隧道内向外钻孔技术是一种安全的技术,不会影响胫骨臼的位置,也不会影响隧道增宽或移植物的长期成熟:证据等级:IV 级。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Experimental Orthopaedics
Journal of Experimental Orthopaedics Medicine-Orthopedics and Sports Medicine
CiteScore
3.20
自引率
5.60%
发文量
114
审稿时长
13 weeks
期刊最新文献
Machine learning in knee injury sequelae detection: Unravelling the role of psychological factors and preventing long-term sequelae Anteroposterior axis of the tibia for kinematic aligned total knee arthroplasty Radiographic acceptable zone of endobutton placement in ACL reconstruction: A prospective study Does free tendon length influence the injury risk of the Achilles tendon? A finite element study Daily physical activity following unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: A pilot study
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1