Download PDF
J Knee Surg
DOI: 10.1055/a-2265-9586
Original Article

Femoral Tunnel Position in Anatomical Double-bundle ACL Reconstruction is not Affected by Blumensaat's Line Morphology

Yoshiyuki Yahagi 
1   Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Nihon University Itabashi Hospital, Tokyo, Japan
,
Takanori Iriuchishima 
2   Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Kamimoku Spa Hospital, Minakami, Japan
3   Department of Functional Morphology, Nihon University School of Medicine, Tokyo, Japan
,
Genki Iwama
1   Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Nihon University Itabashi Hospital, Tokyo, Japan
,
Makoto Suruga
4   Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Nihon University Hospital, Tokyo, Japan
,
Kazuyoshi Nakanishi
1   Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Nihon University Itabashi Hospital, Tokyo, Japan
› Author Affiliations
› Further Information
    Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

The aim of this study was to reveal the influence of the morphological variations of the Blumensaat's line on anteromedial (AM) and posterolateral (PL) femoral tunnel position in anatomical double-bundle anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction.

Fifty-three subjects undergoing anatomical double-bundle ACL reconstruction were included (29 female, 24 male; median age 27.4 years; range: 14–50 years). Using an inside-out transportal technique, the PL tunnel position was made on a line drawn vertically from the bottommost point of the lateral condyle at 90 degrees of knee flexion, spanning a distance of 5 to 8 mm, to the edge of the joint cartilage. AM tunnel position was made 2 mm distal to the PL tunnel position. Following Iriuchishima's classification, the morphology of the Blumensaat's line was classified into straight and hill (large and small) types. Femoral tunnel position was determined using the quadrant method. A Mann–Whitney U test was performed to compare straight and hill type knees according to AM and PL femoral tunnel position.

There were 18 straight and 35 hill type knees (13 small and 22 large hill). AM and PL femoral tunnel position in straight type knees were 21.7 ± 7.0 and 33.6 ± 10.5% in the shallow–deep direction, and 42.1 ± 11.1 and 72.1 ± 8.5% in the high–low direction, respectively. In hill type knees, AM and PL femoral tunnel position were 21.3 ± 5.8 and 36.9 ± 7.1% in the shallow–deep direction, and 44.6 ± 10.7 and 72.1 ± 9.7% in the high–low direction, respectively. No significant difference in AM or PL femoral tunnel position was detected between straight and hill type knees.

AM and PL femoral tunnel position in anatomical double-bundle ACL reconstruction was not affected by the morphological variations of the Blumensaat's line. Surgeons do not need to consider Blumensaat's line morphology if AM and PL femoral tunnel position is targeted at the bottommost point of the lateral condyle. This was a level of evidence III study.

Keywords

ACL - double-bundle ACL reconstruction - Blumensaat's line - femoral tunnel position


Publication History

Received: 03 October 2023

Accepted: 08 February 2024

Accepted Manuscript online:
09 February 2024

Article published online:
04 March 2024

© 2024. Thieme. All rights reserved.

Thieme Medical Publishers, Inc.
333 Seventh Avenue, 18th Floor, New York, NY 10001, USA

 

  • References

  • 1 Diermeier TA, Rothrauff BB, Engebretsen L. et al; Panther Symposium ACL Treatment Consensus Group. Panther symposium ACL treatment consensus group treatment after ACL injury: Panther Symposium ACL Treatment Consensus Group. Br J Sports Med 2021; 55 (01) 14-22
    Google Scholar
  • 2 Fu FH, van Eck CF, Tashman S, Irrgang JJ, Moreland MS. Anatomic anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a changing paradigm. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 2015; 23 (03) 640-648
    Google Scholar
  • 3 James EW, Dawkins BJ, Schachne JM. et al; PLUTO Study Group. Early operative versus delayed operative versus nonoperative treatment of pediatric and adolescent anterior cruciate ligament injuries: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Am J Sports Med 2021; 49 (14) 4008-4017
    Google Scholar
  • 4 Byrne KJ, Hughes JD, Gibbs C. et al. Non-anatomic tunnel position increases the risk of revision anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 2022; 30 (04) 1388-1395
    Google Scholar
  • 5 Fernandes TL, Moreira HH, Andrade R. et al. Clinical outcome evaluation of anatomic anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction with tunnel positioning using gold standard techniques: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Orthop J Sports Med 2021; 9 (06) 23 259671211013327
    Google Scholar
  • 6 Jaecker V, Zapf T, Naendrup JH. et al. High non-anatomic tunnel position rates in ACL reconstruction failure using both transtibial and anteromedial tunnel drilling techniques. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 2017; 137 (09) 1293-1299
    Google Scholar
  • 7 Jiang H, Zhang L, Zhang RY, Zheng QJ, Li MY. Comparison of hamstring and quadriceps strength after anatomical versus non-anatomical anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a retrospective cohort study. BMC Musculoskelet Disord 2021; 22 (01) 452
    Google Scholar
  • 8 Yasuda K, van Eck CF, Hoshino Y, Fu FH, Tashman S. Anatomic single- and double-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction, part 1: Basic science. Am J Sports Med 2011; 39 (08) 1789-1799
    Google Scholar
  • 9 Godin JA. Editorial commentary: anatomic single-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction makes more sense than triple-bundle: three's a crowd. Arthroscopy 2021; 37 (09) 2901-2902
    Google Scholar
  • 10 El-Sherief FAH, Aldahshan WA, Wahd YE. et al. Double-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction is better than single-bundle reconstruction in terms of objective assessment but not in terms of subjective score. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 2018; 26 (08) 2395-2400
    Google Scholar
  • 11 Maeyama A, Hoshino Y, Kato Y. et al. Anatomic double bundle ACL reconstruction outperforms any types of single bundle ACL reconstructions in controlling dynamic rotational laxity. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 2018; 26 (05) 1414-1419
    Google Scholar
  • 12 Seppänen A, Suomalainen P, Huhtala H, Mäenpää H, Kiekara T, Järvelä T. Double bundle ACL reconstruction leads to better restoration of knee laxity and subjective outcomes than single bundle ACL reconstruction. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 2022; 30 (05) 1795-1808
    Google Scholar
  • 13 Severyns M, Mallet J, Plawecki S. Comparison of rotatory and sagittal laxity after single-bundle versus double-bundle ACL reconstruction: outcomes at 7-year follow-up. Orthop J Sports Med 2022; 10 (08) 23 259671221104408
    Google Scholar
  • 14 Tashman S, Zandiyeh P, Irrgang JJ. et al. Anatomic single- and double-bundle ACL reconstruction both restore dynamic knee function: a randomized clinical trial-part II: knee kinematics. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 2021; 29 (08) 2676-2683
    Google Scholar
  • 15 Chen H, Chen B, Tie K, Fu Z, Chen L. Single-bundle versus double-bundle autologous anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials at 5-year minimum follow-up. J Orthop Surg Res 2018; 13 (01) 50
    Google Scholar
  • 16 Irrgang JJ, Tashman S, Patterson CG. et al. Anatomic single vs. double-bundle ACL reconstruction: a randomized clinical trial-Part 1: clinical outcomes. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 2021; 29 (08) 2665-2675
    Google Scholar
  • 17 Sernert N, Hansson E. Similar cost-utility for double- and single-bundle techniques in ACL reconstruction. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 2018; 26 (02) 634-647
    Google Scholar
  • 18 Chiba D, Gale T, Nishida K. et al. Lateral extra-articular tenodesis contributes little to change in vivo kinematics after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a randomized controlled trial. Am J Sports Med 2021; 49 (07) 1803-1812
    Google Scholar
  • 19 Weber AE, Zuke W, Mayer EN. et al. Lateral augmentation procedures in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: anatomic, biomechanical, imaging, and clinical evidence. Am J Sports Med 2019; 47 (03) 740-752
    Google Scholar
  • 20 Williams A. Editorial commentary: The anterolateral ligament. The emperor's new clothes?. Arthroscopy 2018; 34 (04) 1015-1021
    Google Scholar
  • 21 Getgood AMJ, Bryant DM, Litchfield R. et al; STABILITY Study Group. Lateral extra-articular tenodesis reduces failure of hamstring tendon autograft anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: 2-year outcomes from the STABILITY study randomized clinical trial. Am J Sports Med 2020; 48 (02) 285-297
    Google Scholar
  • 22 Na BR, Kwak WK, Seo HY, Seon JK. Clinical outcomes of anterolateral ligament reconstruction or lateral extra-articular tenodesis combined with primary ACL reconstruction: a systematic review with meta-analysis. Orthop J Sports Med 2021; 9 (09) 23 259671211023099
    Google Scholar
  • 23 Oh JY, Kim KT, Park YJ. et al. Biomechanical comparison of single-bundle versus double-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a meta-analysis. Knee Surg Relat Res 2020; 32 (01) 14
    Google Scholar
  • 24 Sheean AJ, Lian J, Tisherman R. et al. Augmentation of anatomic anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction with lateral extra-articular tenodesis does not significantly affect rotatory knee laxity: a time zero, in vivo kinematic analysis. Am J Sports Med 2020; 48 (14) 3495-3502
    Google Scholar
  • 25 Iriuchishima T, Ryu K, Aizawa S, Fu FH. Blumensaat's line is not always straight: morphological variations of the lateral wall of the femoral intercondylar notch. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 2016; 24 (09) 2752-2757
    Google Scholar
  • 26 Iriuchishima T, Ryu K, Aizawa S, Fu FH. The difference in centre position in the ACL femoral footprint inclusive and exclusive of the fan-like extension fibres. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 2016; 24 (01) 254-259
    Google Scholar
  • 27 Bernard M, Hertel P, Hornung H, Cierpinski T. Femoral insertion of the ACL. Radiographic quadrant method. Am J Knee Surg 1997; 10 (01) 14-21 , discussion 21–22
    Google Scholar
  • 28 Miyaji N, Araki D, Hoshino Y. et al. The sagittal cutting plane affects evaluation of the femoral bone tunnel position on three-dimensional computed tomography after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 2021; 29 (02) 398-404
    Google Scholar
  • 29 Mochizuki Y, Kaneko T, Kawahara K. et al. The quadrant method measuring four points is as a reliable and accurate as the quadrant method in the evaluation after anatomical double-bundle ACL reconstruction. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 2018; 26 (08) 2389-2394
    Google Scholar
  • 30 Farrow LD, Chen MR, Cooperman DR, Goodfellow DB, Robbin MS. Radiographic classification of the femoral intercondylar notch posterolateral rim. Arthroscopy 2008; 24 (10) 1109-1114
    Google Scholar
  • 31 Yahagi Y, Iriuchishima T, Horaguchi T, Suruga M, Tokuhashi Y, Aizawa S. The importance of Blumensaat's line morphology for accurate femoral ACL footprint evaluation using the quadrant method. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 2018; 26 (02) 455-461
    Google Scholar
  • 32 Iriuchishima T, Goto B, Ryu K, Fu FH, Fu FH. The Blumensaat's line morphology influences to the femoral tunnel position in anatomical ACL reconstruction. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 2019; 27 (11) 3638-3643
    Google Scholar
  • 33 Xu H, Zhang C, Zhang Q. et al. A systematic review of anterior cruciate ligament femoral footprint location evaluated by quadrant method for single-bundle and double-bundle anatomic reconstruction. Arthroscopy 2016; 32 (08) 1724-1734
    Google Scholar
  • 34 Lee YS, Lee BK, Moon DH, Park HG, Kim WS, Moon CW. Comparison of tunnel locations of double bundle ACL reconstruction using the conventional transtibial technique with anatomic tunnel locations using a 3D CT model. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 2013; 133 (08) 1121-1128
    Google Scholar
  • 35 Sim JA, Kim JM, Lee S, Bae JY, Seon JK. Comparison of tunnel variability between trans-portal and outside-in techniques in ACL reconstruction. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 2017; 25 (04) 1227-1233
    Google Scholar
  • 36 Nakamura K, Nakamura T, Horie M. et al. Anatomic femoral tunnel placement is difficult by the transtibial technique: comparison of three different femoral tunnel drilling techniques in double-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstructions. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 2020; 28 (02) 584-593
    Google Scholar
  • 37 Ferretti M, Ekdahl M, Shen W, Fu FH. Osseous landmarks of the femoral attachment of the anterior cruciate ligament: an anatomic study. Arthroscopy 2007; 23 (11) 1218-1225
    Google Scholar
  • 38 Fu FH, Jordan SS. The lateral intercondylar ridge–a key to anatomic anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2007; 89 (10) 2103-2104
    Google Scholar
  • 39 Zantop T, Petersen W, Sekiya JK, Musahl V, Fu FH. Anterior cruciate ligament anatomy and function relating to anatomical reconstruction. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 2006; 14 (10) 982-992
    Google Scholar
  • 40 Muneta T, Koga H, Nakamura T, Horie M, Watanabe T, Sekiya I. Behind-remnant arthroscopic observation and scoring of femoral attachment of injured anterior cruciate ligament. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 2016; 24 (09) 2906-2914
    Google Scholar
  • 41 Steiner M. Anatomic single-bundle ACL reconstruction. Sports Med Arthrosc Rev 2009; 17 (04) 247-251
    Google Scholar
  • 42 van Eck CF, Martins CA, Vyas SM, Celentano U, van Dijk CN, Fu FH. Femoral intercondylar notch shape and dimensions in ACL-injured patients. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 2010; 18 (09) 1257-1262
    Google Scholar