Hernández-Guízar G, Rangel-Gutiérrez F, Rivera-De CE, Guevara-Rodríguez VA, Álvarez-Carrillo GA, Morales-Álvarez JJ

Language: Spanish
References: 20
Page: 112-120
PDF size: 280.88 Kb.

ABSTRACT

Introduction: Injuries to the anterior cruciate ligament total between 100,000 and 200,000 cases a year, each year in the United States about 100,000 reconstructions are perfomed, with good results ranging between 75 and 90%. The most common femoral tunnel drilling technique is the transtibial, however, there is currently a change in the choice to the anteromedial technique, which reconstructs the more anatomical femoral tunnel, this in order to improve rotational stability. Objective: To compare the functional results after the reconstruction of the anterior cruciate ligament with the transtibial versus anteromedial femoral tunnel drilling technique, in the patient from Unidad Médica de Atención Ambulatoria (UMAA) No. 90, Torreón, Coahuila, period 2020-2021. Material and methods: Comparative, crossectional and ambispective study in patients with a diagnosis of anterior cruciate ligament injury who underwent reconstruction at UMAA 90 Torreón, Coahuila, México. Results: Thirty-two patients who underwent reconstruction of the anterior cruciate ligament with hamstring autograft were included, 90.6% male. The mean age was 27.7 ± 7.3, with a range of 17 to 45 years. 62.5% (n = 20) had a right knee injury and 37.5% (n = 12) left knee, 53.1% (n = 17) underwent an anteromedial approach and 46.9% (n = 15) a transtibial approach. There were no significant differences in the results (p < 0.05) at the third and fifth month, both groups had similar results in the Lysholm and IKDC (International Knee Documentation Committee) tests. Conclusions: Reconstruction of the anterior cruciate ligament with hamstring autograft using the anteromedial or transtibial femoral tunnel techniques showed similar results without significant differences in the short term.

REFERENCES

1. Siegel L, Vandenakker-Albanese C, Siegel D. Anterior cruciate ligament injuries: anatomy, physiology, biomechanics, and management. Clin J Sport Med. 2012; 22 (4): 349-355.

2. Ayala-Mejías JD, García-Estrada GA, Alcocer Pérez-España L. Anterior cruciate ligament lesions. Acta Ortop Mex. 2014; 28 (1): 57-67.

3. Sgaglione NA, Lubowitz JH, Provencher MT. The knee. ANAA Advanced Arthroscopic Surgical Techniques. 2016; (1): 389-404.

4. Kaeding CC, Léger-St-Jean B, Magnussen RA. Epidemiology and diagnosis of anterior cruciate ligament injuries. Clin Sports Med. 2017; 36 (1): 1-8.

5. Koutras G, Papadopoulos P, Terzidis IP, Gigis I, Pappas E. Short-term functional and clinical outcomes after ACL reconstruction with hamstrings autograft: transtibial versus anteromedial portal technique. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2013; 21 (8): 1904-1909.

6. Liu A, Sun M, Ma C, et al. Clinical outcomes of transtibial versus anteromedial drilling techniques to prepare the femoral tunnel during anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2017; 25 (9): 2751-2759.

7. Rezazadeh S, Ettehadi H, Vosoughi AR. Outcome of arthroscopic single-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: anteromedial portal technique versus transtibial drilling technique. Musculoskelet Surg. 2016; 100 (1): 37-41.

8. Ozer M, Ozer H, Selek H, et al. Radiological and functional comparison of single-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: transtibial versus anteromedial technique. Turk J Med Sci. 2018; 48 (3): 455-461.

9. Kilinc BE, Kara A, Oc Y, et al. Transtibial vs anatomical single bundle technique for anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a retrospective cohort study. Int J Surg. 2016; 29: 62-69.

10. Chalmers PN, Mall NA, Cole BJ, Verma NN, Bush-Joseph CA, Bach BR Jr. Anteromedial versus transtibial tunnel drilling in anterior cruciate ligament reconstructions: a systematic review. Arthroscopy. 2013; 29 (7): 1235-1242.

11. Robin BN, Lubowitz JH. Disadvantages and advantages of transtibial technique for creating the anterior cruciate ligament femoral socket. J Knee Surg. 2014; 27 (5): 327-330.

12. Wang H, Fleischli JE, Zheng NN. Transtibial versus anteromedial portal technique in single-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: outcomes of knee joint kinematics during walking. Am J Sports Med. 2013; 41 (8): 1847-1856.

13. Alentorn-Geli E, Samitier G, Alvarez P, Steinbacher G, Cugat R. Anteromedial portal versus transtibial drilling techniques in ACL reconstruction: a blinded cross-sectional study at two- to five-year follow-up. Int Orthop. 2010; 34 (5): 747-754.

14. Franceschi F, Papalia R, Rizzello G, Del Buono A, Maffulli N, Denaro V. Anteromedial portal versus transtibial drilling techniques in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: any clinical relevance? A retrospective comparative study. Arthroscopy. 2013; 29 (8): 1330-1337.

15. Mayr R, Rosenberger R, Agraharam D, Smekal V, El Attal R. Revision anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: an update. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 2012; 132 (9): 1299-313.

16. Loucas M, Loucas R, D'Ambrosi R, Hantes ME. Clinical and radiological outcomes of anteromedial portal versus transtibial technique in ACL recosntruction. A systemactic review. Orthop J Sports Med. 2021; 9 (7): 23259671211024591.

17. Wilk KE, Arrigo CA. Rehabilitation Principles of the Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstructed Knee: Twelve Steps for Successful Progression and Return to Play. Clin Sports Med. 2017; 36 (1): 189-232.

18. Guerrero Molina JA, Espregueira MJ. Retorno al deporte tras la reconstrucción del ligamento cruzado anterior. Rev Esp Artrosc Cir Articul. 2020: 27 (3); 251-259.

19. Tegner Y, Lysholm J. Rating systems in the evaluation of knee ligament injuries. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1985; 198: 43-49.

20. Hefti F, Muller W, Jakob RP, Staubli HU. Evaluation of knee ligament injuries with the IKDC form. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 1993; 1: 226-234.