Purpose The present study aimed to investigate the three-dimensional topographic anatomy of the anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) bundle attachment in both ACL-rupture and ACL-intact patients who sufered a noncontact knee injury and identify potential diferences. Methods Magnetic resonance images of 90 ACL-rupture knees and 90 matched ACL-intact knees, who sufered a noncontact knee injury, were used to create 3D ACL insertion models. Results In the ACL-rupture knees, the femoral origin of the anteromedial (AM) bundle was 24.5 ± 9.0% posterior and 45.5 ± 10.5% proximal to the lexion-extension axis (FEA), whereas the posterolateral (PL) bundle origin was 35.5 ± 12.5% posterior and 22.4 ± 10.3% distal to the FEA. In ACL-rupture knees, the tibial insertion of the AM-bundle was 34.3 ± 4.6% of the tibial plateau depth and 50.7 ± 3.5% of the tibial plateau width, whereas the PL-bundle insertion was 47.5 ± 4.1% of the tibial plateau depth and 56.9 ± 3.4% of the tibial plateau width. In ACL-intact knees, the origin of the AM-bundle was 17.5 ± 9.1% posterior (p < 0.01) and 42.3 ± 10.5% proximal (n.s.) to the FEA, whereas the PL-bundle origin was 32.1 ± 11.1% posterior (n.s.) and 16.3 ± 9.4% distal (p < 0.01) to the FEA. In ACL-intact knees, the insertion of the AM-bundle was 34.4 ± 6.6% of the tibial plateau depth (n.s.) and 48.1 ± 4.6% of the tibial plateau width (n.s.), whereas the PL-bundle insertion was 42.7 ± 5.4% of the tibial plateau depth (p < 0.01) and 57.1 ± 4.8% of the tibial plateau width (n.s.). ConclusionThe current study revealed variations in the three-dimensional topographic anatomy of the native ACL between ACL-rupture and ACL-intact knees, which might help surgeons who perform anatomical double-bundle reconstruction surgery. Level of evidence III.
PurposeThe aims of the present study were (1) to investigate the tibial footprint location of the anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) in both ACL‐ruptured and ACL‐intact patients, (2) to identify the relationship of the tibial footprint to the anterior root of the lateral meniscus (ARLM) and medial tibial spine (MTS), and (3) to evaluate the reliability of the ARLM and MTS for identifying the center of the tibial ACL footprint. MethodsMagnetic resonance images of 90 knees with ACL rupture and 90 matched‐controlled knees were used to create three‐dimensional models of the tibia. The tibial ACL footprint was outlined on each model, and its location was measured using an anatomical coordinate system. ResultsNo significant difference in the location of the tibial footprint was found between ACL‐ruptured and ACL‐intact knees. The tibial ACL footprint was located in very close proximity to the ARLM, especially in the M/L direction. The safe zone of tibial tunnel reaming for avoiding damage to the ARLM was 2.6 mm lateral to the center of the native tibial footprint. Both the ARLM and MTS were reliable intraoperative landmarks for identifying the tibial footprint. ConclusionsOrthopedic surgeons should be aware of the safe zone of tibial tunnel reaming for avoiding injury to the ARLM. Both the ARLM and MTS might be reliable landmarks for identifying the center of the tibial ACL footprint and may facilitate tibial tunnel placement during anatomical single‐bundle ACL reconstruction, especially in cases of revision where the tibial ACL stump is not available. Level of EvidenceLevel III.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.