Download PDF
J Knee Surg 2023; 36(03): 298-304
DOI: 10.1055/s-0041-1731826
Original Article

Biomechanical Analysis of Ideal Knee Flexion Angle for ACL Graft Tensioning Utilizing Multiple Femoral and Tibial Tunnel Locations

Jon E. Hammarstedt 
1   Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Allegheny Health Network, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania
,
J. Jared Guth
1   Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Allegheny Health Network, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania
,
Patrick J. Schimoler
1   Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Allegheny Health Network, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania
,
Alexander Kharlamov
1   Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Allegheny Health Network, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania
,
Mark C. Miller
1   Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Allegheny Health Network, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania
,
Sam Akhavan
1   Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Allegheny Health Network, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania
,
Patrick J. Demeo
› Author Affiliations
› Further Information
    Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

Anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) graft failure rate has been reported to be greater than 5% at 5 years. Our study evaluated ACL excursion with anatomic and nonanatomic femoral and tibial tunnels to determine optimal flexion angle to tension the ACL to minimize excursion. Ten cadaveric knee specimens were used. The ACL was sectioned and the femoral and tibial attachments were marked. A 1/16-inch drill created a tunnel in the center of the ACL footprint on the tibia and femur and additional tunnels were made 5 mm from this. A suture was passed through each tunnel combination and attached to a string potentiometer. The knee was ranged from full extension to 120 degrees of flexion for 10 cycles while mounted in a custom fixture. The change in length (excursion) of the suture during movement was recorded for each combination of femoral and tibial tunnels. Anatomic reconstruction of the ACL with tunnel placement in the center of the femoral and tibial footprint did not result in an isometric graft, with excursion of the ACL during knee motion of 7.46 mm (standard deviation [SD]: 2.7mm), greatest at 2.84 degrees of flexion (SD: 4.22). The tunnel combination that resulted in the least excursion was a femoral footprint 5 mm anterior to the femoral and 5 mm posterior to the tibial footprint (4. 2mm, SD: 1.37 mm). The tunnel combination that resulted in the most excursion utilized femoral footprint 5 mm proximal to the femoral and 5 mm posterior to the tibial footprint (9.81 mm, SD: 2.68 mm). Anatomic ACL reconstruction results in significant excursion of the ACL throughout motion. If not tensioned properly, the ACL can stretch during range of motion, potentially leading to rerupture. To prevent stretching of the graft, the current biomechanical study recommends tensioning an anatomic ACL reconstruction at its point of maximal excursion, or between 0 and 5 degrees of flexion. The level of evidence is IV.

Keywords

ACL - reconstruction - femoral tunnel - tibial tunnel


Publication History

Received: 30 November 2020

Accepted: 31 May 2021

Article published online:
29 July 2021

© 2021. Thieme. All rights reserved.

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

 

  • References

  • 1 Tejwani SG, Prentice HA, Wyatt Jr RWB, Maletis GB. Femoral tunnel drilling method: risk of reoperation and revision after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Am J Sports Med 2018; 46 (14) 3378-3384
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Eysturoy NH, Nielsen TG, Lind MC. Anteromedial portal drilling yielded better survivorship of anterior cruciate ligament reconstructions when comparing recent versus early surgeries with this technique. Arthroscopy 2019; 35 (01) 182-189
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Osti M, Krawinkel A, Ostermann M, Hoffelner T, Benedetto KP. Femoral and tibial graft tunnel parameters after transtibial, anteromedial portal, and outside-in single-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Am J Sports Med 2015; 43 (09) 2250-2258
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Jepsen CF, Lundberg-Jensen AK, Faunoe P. Does the position of the femoral tunnel affect the laxity or clinical outcome of the anterior cruciate ligament-reconstructed knee? A clinical, prospective, randomized, double-blind study. Arthroscopy 2007; 23 (12) 1326-1333
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Kaseta MK, DeFrate LE, Charnock BL, Sullivan RT, Garrett Jr WE. Reconstruction technique affects femoral tunnel placement in ACL reconstruction. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2008; 466 (06) 1467-1474
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Hart A, Sivakumaran T, Burman M, Powell T, Martineau PA. A Prospective evaluation of femoral tunnel placement for anatomic anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction using 3-dimensional magnetic resonance imaging. Am J Sports Med 2018; 46 (01) 192-199
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Hohmann E, Bryant A, Tetsworth K. Tunnel positioning in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: how long is the learning curve?. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 2010; 18 (11) 1576-1582
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 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
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Scheffler SU, Maschewski K, Becker R, Asbach P. In-vivo three-dimensional MR imaging of the intact anterior cruciate ligament shows a variable insertion pattern of the femoral and tibial footprints. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 2018; 26 (12) 3667-3672
    Google Scholar
  • 10 Hoshino Y, Nagamune K, Yagi M. et al. The effect of intra-operative knee flexion angle on determination of graft location in the anatomic double-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 2009; 17 (09) 1052-1060
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Parkar AP, Adriaensen MEAPM, Vindfeld S, Solheim E. The anatomic centers of the femoral and tibial insertions of the anterior cruciate ligament: a systematic review of imaging and cadaveric studies reporting normal center locations. Am J Sports Med 2017; 45 (09) 2180-2188
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Lubowitz JH. Anatomic ACL reconstruction produces greater graft length change during knee range-of-motion than transtibial technique. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 2014; 22 (05) 1190-1195
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Ebersole GM, Eckerle P, Farrow LD, Cutuk A, Bledsoe G, Kaar S. Anterior cruciate ligament graft isometry is affected by the orientation of the femoral tunnel. J Knee Surg 2016; 29 (03) 260-266
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Rahnemai-Azar AA, Sabzevari S, Irarrázaval S, Chao T, Fu FH. Anatomical individualized ACL reconstruction. Arch Bone Jt Surg 2016; 4 (04) 291-297
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Austin JC, Phornphutkul C, Wojtys EM. Loss of knee extension after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: effects of knee position and graft tensioning. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2007; 89 (07) 1565-1574
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Dhawan A, Gallo RA, Lynch SA. Anatomic tunnel placement in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. J Am Acad Orthop Surg 2016; 24 (07) 443-454
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Harner CD, Poehling GG. Double bundle or double trouble?. Arthroscopy 2004; 20 (10) 1013-1014
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Robinson J, Inderhaug E, Harlem T, Spalding T, Brown Jr CH. Anterior cruciate ligament femoral tunnel placement: an analysis of the intended versus achieved position for 221 international high-volume ACL surgeons. Am J Sports Med 2020; 48 (05) 1088-1099
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Varady NH, Kernkamp WA, Li J. et al. The biomechanical effect of tunnel placement on ACL graft forces in double-bundle ACL reconstruction - A 3D computational simulation. Int J Med Robot 2017; 13 (04) e1840 DOI: 10.1002/rcs.1840.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Zavras TD, Race A, Bull AMJ, Amis AA. A comparative study of ‘isometric’ points for anterior cruciate ligament graft attachment. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 2001; 9 (01) 28-33
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Smith JO, Yasen S, Risebury MJ, Wilson AJ. Femoral and tibial tunnel positioning on graft isometry in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a cadaveric study. J Orthop Surg (Hong Kong) 2014; 22 (03) 318-324
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Abebe ES, Kim J-P, Utturkar GM. et al. The effect of femoral tunnel placement on ACL graft orientation and length during in vivo knee flexion. J Biomech 2011; 44 (10) 1914-1920
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 23 Cain Jr EL, Biggers MD, Beason DP, Emblom BA, Dugas JR. Comparison of anterior cruciate ligament graft isometry between paired femoral and tibial tunnels. J Knee Surg 2017; 30 (09) 960-964
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 24 Forsythe B, Lansdown D, Zuke WA. et al. Dynamic 3-dimensional mapping of isometric anterior cruciate ligament attachment sites on the tibia and femur: is anatomic also isometric?. Arthroscopy 2018; 34 (08) 2466-2475
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar