4.5 Article

Optimal entry position on the lateral femoral surface for outside-in drilling technique to restore the anatomical footprint of anterior cruciate ligament

期刊

KNEE SURGERY SPORTS TRAUMATOLOGY ARTHROSCOPY
卷 24, 期 9, 页码 2758-2766

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s00167-014-3460-0

关键词

Anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction; Arthroscopy; Surgical technique; Computer simulation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

To investigate the optimal starting points for drilling on the lateral femoral condyle for better coverage of the anatomical footprint of the anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) using the outside-in (OI) technique in a single-bundle ACL reconstruction. Femoral tunnel drilling was simulated on three-dimensional bone models from 40 subjects by connecting the centre of the ACL footprint with various points on the lateral femoral surface. The percentage of the femoral footprint covered by apertures of the virtual tunnel sockets with 9 mm diameter was calculated for each tunnel. The mean percentages of the femoral footprint covered by the apertures of the virtual tunnel sockets were significantly higher when drilled at 2 and 3 cm from the lateral epicondyle on a 45A degrees line and a 60A degrees line anterior from the proximal-distal axis than the other points. However, articular cartilage damage was occurred in nine subjects at 3 cm on a 60A degrees line and eight subjects at 3 cm on a 45A degrees line. Posterior wall blowout occurred in five subjects at 3 cm on a 45A degrees line. Thus, OI drilling at 3 cm from the epicondyle has a risk of these complications. During the OI drilling of the femoral tunnel, connecting the centre of the anatomical footprint of the ACL and the entry drilling point at 2 cm from the lateral epicondyle on between the 45A degrees line and the 60A degrees line anterior from the proximal-distal axis provides an oval-shaped socket aperture that covers and restores the native ACL footprint as nearly as possible. III.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据