Does Remnant Preservation Influence Tibial Tunnel Enlargement or Graft-to-Bone Integration After Double-Bundle Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction Using Hamstring Autografts and Suspensory Fixation? A Computed Tomography and Magnetic Resonance Imaging Evaluation. Issue 8 (22nd August 2018)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Naraoka, Takuya; Kimura, Yuka; Tsuda, Eiichi; Yamamoto, Yuji; Ishibashi, Yasuyuki
• Is Part Of: Orthopaedic journal of sports medicine. Volume 6:Issue 8(2018)
• Publication Date: 2018-08-22
• Subjects: anterior cruciate ligament -- double-bundle reconstruction -- remnant tissue -- tibial tunnel -- tunnel enlargement -- tunnel integration; Sports medicine -- Periodicals; Orthopedics -- Periodicals; Arthroscopy -- Periodicals; Arthroplasty -- Periodicals; Knee -- Surgery -- Periodicals; 616.7
• DOI: 10.1177/2325967118790238
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 2325-9671

Abstract

Background: Remnant-preserving anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction was introduced to improve clinical outcomes and biological healing. However, the influences of remnant preservation on tibial tunnel position and enlargement are still uncertain. Purpose: To evaluate whether remnant-preserving ACL reconstruction influences tibial tunnel position or enlargement and to examine the relationship between tunnel enlargement and graft-to-bone integration in the tibial tunnel. Study Design: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 2. Methods: A total of 91 knees with double-bundle ACL reconstructions were enrolled in this study. ACL reconstruction was performed without a remnant (<25% of the intra-articular portion of the graft) in 44 knees (nonremnant [NR] group) and with remnant preservation in the remaining 47 knees (remnant-preserving [RP] group). Tibial tunnel position and enlargement were assessed using computed tomography (CT). Comparisons between groups were performed. Furthermore, graft-to-bone integration in the tibial tunnel was evaluated using magnetic resonance imaging, and the relationship between tunnel enlargement and graft-to-bone integration at 1 year after ACL reconstruction was assessed. Results: A total of 48 knees (25 in NR group, 23 in RP group) were included; 19 and 24 knees in the NR and RP groups were excluded, respectively, because of graft reruptures and a lack of CT scans. There were no significant between-group differences in tibial tunnel position ( P > .05). The degree of posterolateral tunnel enlargement in the axial plane was significantly higher in the RP group than that in the NR group ( P = .007) 1 year after ACL reconstruction. The degree of anteromedial tunnel enlargement on axial CT was significantly smaller in knees with graft-to-bone integration than in those without integration ( P = .002) 1 year after ACL reconstruction. Conclusion: ACL reconstruction with remnant preservation did not influence tibial tunnel position and did not decrease the degree or incidence of tibial tunnel enlargement. At 1 year postoperatively, tunnel enlargement did not affect graft-to-bone integration in the posterolateral tunnel, but graft-to-bone integration was delayed in the anteromedial tunnel.