ALL reconstruction and lateral extra-articular tenodesis have been described in combination with intra-articular ACL reconstruction to address rotational laxity. This study demonstrated that both procedures resulted in significant reductions of tibial internal rotation versus the intact state independent of graft tension or fixation angle, although anterior tibial translation was generally restored to intact values. The influence of overconstraint with anterolateral knee reconstruction procedures has not been fully evaluated in the clinical setting and warrants continued evaluation based on the findings of this biomechanical study.

Meniscal ramp lesions should be repaired at the time of ACLR to avoid continued knee instability (anterior tibial translation) and to eliminate the pivot-shift phenomenon.

Background: Anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) tears are one of the most common injuries among athletes. However, the ability to fully restore rotational stability with ACL reconstruction (ACLR) remains a challenge, as evidenced by the persistence of rotational instability in up to 25% of patients after surgery. Advocacy for reconstruction of the anterolateral ligament (ALL) is rapidly increasing because some biomechanical studies have reported that the ALL is a significant contributor to internal rotational stability of the knee. Hypothesis/Purpose: The purpose of this study was to assess the effect of ALL reconstruction (ALLR) graft fixation angle on knee joint kinematics in the clinically relevant setting of a concomitant ACLR and to determine the optimal ALLR graft fixation angle. It was hypothesized that all fixation angles would significantly reduce rotational laxity compared with the sectioned ALL state. Study Design: Controlled laboratory study. Methods: Ten nonpaired fresh-frozen human cadaveric knees underwent a full kinematic assessment in each of the following states: (1) intact; (2) anatomic single-bundle (SB) ACLR with intact ALL; (3) anatomic SB ACLR with sectioned ALL; (4) anatomic SB ACLR with 7 anatomic ALLR states using graft fixation angles of 0°, 15°, 30°, 45°, 60°, 75°, and 90°; and (5) sectioned ACL and ALL. Internal rotation during a 5-N·m internal rotation torque and anterior translation during an 88-N anterior load were recorded at 15° flexion intervals between 0° and 120°. Axial plane translation and internal rotation during a simulated pivot-shift test (combined 5-N·m internal rotation and 10-N·m valgus torques) were recorded between 0° and 60°. Kinematic changes were measured and compared with the intact state for all reconstructed and sectioned states. Results: Anatomic ALLR at all graft fixation angles significantly overconstrained internal rotation of the knee joint beyond 30° of flexion and at 45° and 60° during the pivot-shift test. Furthermore, there were no significant knee kinematic differences between any tested graft fixation angles during anterior drawer, pivot-shift, and internal rotation tests. Conclusion: Anatomic ALLR in conjunction with an ACLR significantly reduced rotatory laxity of the knee beyond 30° of knee flexion. However, ALLR, regardless of fixation angle, resulted in significant overconstraint of the knee. Clinical Relevance: ALLR at any fixation angle overconstrained native joint kinematics and should be performed with careful consideration. Further investigation into the application and target population for ALLR is strongly recommended.

Background: Previous work has reported that increased tibial slope is directly correlated with increased anterior tibial translation, possibly predisposing patients to higher rates of anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) tears and causing higher rates of ACL graft failures over the long term. However, the effect of changes in sagittal plane tibial slope on ACL reconstruction (ACLR) graft force has not been well defined. Purpose/Hypothesis: The purpose of this study was to quantify the effect of changes in sagittal plane tibial slope on ACLR graft force at varying knee flexion angles. Our null hypothesis was that changing the sagittal plane tibial slope would not affect force on the ACL graft. Study Design: Controlled laboratory study. Methods: Ten male fresh-frozen cadaveric knees had a posterior tibial osteotomy performed and an external fixator placed for testing and accurate slope adjustment. Following ACLR, specimens were compressed with a 200-N axial load at flexion angles of 0°, 15°, 30°, 45°, and 60°, and the graft loads were recorded through a force transducer clamped to the graft. Tibial slope was varied between −2° and 20° of posterior slope at 2° increments under these test conditions. Results: ACL graft force in the loaded testing state increased linearly as slope increased. This effect was independent of flexion angle. The final model utilized a 2-factor linear mixed-effects regression model and noted a significant, highly positive, and linear relationship between tibial slope and ACL graft force in axially loaded knees at all flexion angles tested (slope coefficient = 0.92, SE = 0.08, P < .001). Significantly higher graft force was also observed at 0° of flexion as compared with all other flexion angles for the loaded condition (all P < .001). Conclusion: The authors found that tibial slope had a strong linear relationship to the amount of graft force experienced by an ACL graft in axially loaded knees. Thus, a flatter tibial slope had significantly less loading of ACL grafts, while steeper slopes increased ACL graft loading. Our biomechanical findings support recent clinical evidence of increased ACL graft failure with steeper tibial slope secondary to increased graft loading. Clinical Relevance: Evaluation of the effect of increasing tibial slope on ACL graft force can guide surgeons when deciding if a slope-decreasing proximal tibial osteotomy should be performed before a revision ACLR. Overall, as slope increases, ACL graft force increases, and in our study, flatter slopes had lower ACL graft forces and were protective of the ACLR graft.

Background:The biomechanical effects of lateral meniscal posterior root tears with and without meniscofemoral ligament (MFL) tears in anterior cruciate ligament (ACL)–deficient knees have not been studied in detail.Purpose:To determine the biomechanical effects of the lateral meniscus (LM) posterior root tear in ACL-intact and ACL-deficient knees. In addition, the biomechanical effects of disrupting the MFLs in ACL-deficient knees with meniscal root tears were evaluated.Study Design:Controlled laboratory study.Methods:Ten paired cadaveric knees were mounted in a 6-degrees-of-freedom robot for testing and divided into 2 groups. The sectioning order for group 1 was (1) ACL, (2) LM posterior root, and (3) MFLs, and the order for group 2 was (1) LM posterior root, (2) ACL, and (3) MFLs. For each cutting state, displacements and rotations of the tibia were measured and compared with the intact state after a simulated pivot-shift test (5-N·m internal rotation torque combined with a 10-N·m valgus torque) at 0°, 20°, 30°, 60°, and 90° of knee flexion; an anterior translation load (88 N) at 0°, 30°, 60°, and 90° of knee flexion; and internal rotation (5 N·m) at 0°, 30°, 60°, 75°, and 90°.Results:Cutting the LM root and MFLs significantly increased anterior tibial translation (ATT) during a pivot-shift test at 20° and 30° when compared with the ACL-cut state (both Ps < .05). During a 5-N·m internal rotation torque, cutting the LM root in ACL-intact knees significantly increased internal rotation by between 0.7° ± 0.3° and 1.3° ± 0.9° (all Ps < .05) except at 0° (P = .136). When the ACL + LM root cut state was compared with the ACL-cut state, the increase in internal rotation was significant at greater flexion angles of 75° and 90° (both Ps < .05) but not between 0°and 60° (all Ps > .2). For an anterior translation load, cutting the LM root in ACL-deficient knees significantly increased ATT only at 30° (P = .007).Conclusion:The LM posterior root was a significant stabilizer of the knee for ATT during a pivot-shift test at lower flexion angles and internal rotation at higher flexion angles.Clinical Relevance:Increased knee anterior translation and rotatory instability due to posterior lateral meniscal root disruption may contribute to increased loads on an ACL reconstruction graft. It is recommended that lateral meniscal root tears be repaired at the same time as an ACL reconstruction to prevent possible ACL graft overload.