Twenty-Year Experience of a Double-Bundle Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction.
10.4055/cios.2015.7.2.143
- Author:
Takeshi MUNETA
1
Author Information
1. Department of Joint Surgery and Sports Medicine, Graduate School of Medicine, Tokyo Medical and Dental University, Tokyo, Japan. muneta.orj@tmd.ac.jp
- Publication Type:Review
- Keywords:
Anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction;
Anatomy;
Tunnel;
Remnant
- MeSH:
Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction/*methods;
Humans;
Time Factors
- From:Clinics in Orthopedic Surgery
2015;7(2):143-151
- CountryRepublic of Korea
- Language:English
-
Abstract:
Double-bundle (DB) anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction using a four-strand semitendinosus tendon was started in our department in July 1994. The motivation for starting the procedure was that the EndoButton with an inside-out procedure instrument became available in Japan. A review article of our DB ACL reconstruction procedure was summarized for the twentieth anniversary of the surgical procedure. Initial tension setting of the two grafts was changed in the first 8 years to achieve better stability during DB ACL reconstruction. A randomized clinical trial (RCT) was started in July 2002 to clarify superiority of the DB procedure to single-bundle (SB) reconstruction under the concept of anatomic reconstruction. Several anatomic studies were performed to describe normal ACL anatomy, which is essential for realizing anatomic reconstruction. A remnant-preserving technique would be an additional option for our DB procedure to improve reconstruction outcomes. Thus, a new remnant-preserving DB procedure was started in 2012. The reproducibility of the new procedure was investigated using three-dimensional computed tomography images. More complex procedures were performed using a transtibial technique and EndoButtons. Initial tension balancing between the two grafts was important for a better outcome. Superiority of knee stability after the DB compared to that after the SB procedure was clarified by the RCT. However, no patient consensus has been reached on any subjective advantage to the DB procedure. Studies of normal ACL anatomy have left questions unresolved regarding where the two tunnels should be created for direct and indirect insertions based on normal anatomy. A new remnant-preserving DB ACL procedure has been practiced. The procedure was more reproducible with respect to creating the femoral tunnel. DB ACL reconstruction using a semitendinosus tendon is an attractive option when pursuing a better outcome for patients.
