Tags

Type your tag names separated by a space and hit enter

Does the anteromedial portal provide clinical superiority compared to the transtibial portal in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction in nonprofessional athletes in short-term follow-up?
Acta Orthop Traumatol Turc 2015; 49(5):483-91AO

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

Two drilling techniques of the femoral tunnel are commonly used in anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction: through the transtibial (TT) portal or through the anteromedial (AM) portal. The aim of the present study is to investigate the radiological and clinical outcomes of arthroscopic single-bundle ACL reconstruction using AM and TT portal techniques for drilling the femoral tunnel in nonprofessional athletes.

METHODS

A retrospective review was made of 44 nonprofessional athletes undergoing ACL reconstruction using AM and TT techniques between 2011-2013. The femoral tunnel clock position on axial magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and the anterior-posterior position of the tibial tunnel on sagittal-cut MRI scan were measured. Radiological femoral tunnel and tibial tunnel anterior-posterior inclination angles were assessed. At final follow-up, the Lachman test and pivot-shift test were used in the evaluation of the anterior-posterior stability of the knee and the rotational stability of the knee. For clinical and functional evaluation, the modified Cincinnati knee grading system, Lysholm knee scoring scale, and International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) form were used.

RESULTS

No statistically significant difference was determined between the groups in terms of patient age, follow-up period, gender, and affected side distribution. There were 6 outliers in the TT group due to the clock face position. The mean femoral tunnel inclination angle was 31.07°±8.44° in the AM group and 19.02°±8.93° in the TT group. The tibial tunnel inclination angle was 21.08°±5.42° in the TT group and 16.58°±7.02° in the AM group. A statistically significant difference was determined between the 2 groups. No statistically significant difference was observed between the 2 groups in terms of Lachman test, pivot-shift test, Lysholm score, IKDC score, and modified Cincinnati score results.

CONCLUSION

The AM technique has no clinical superiority compared to the TT technique in ACL reconstruction in nonprofessional athletes.

Authors+Show Affiliations

Lütfi Kırdar Kartal Training and Research Hospital, Department of Orthopaedics and Traumatology, İstanbul, Turkey.Lütfi Kırdar Kartal Training and Research Hospital, Department of Orthopaedics and Traumatology, İstanbul, Turkey.Lütfi Kırdar Kartal Training and Research Hospital, Department of Orthopaedics and Traumatology, İstanbul, Turkey.Lütfi Kırdar Kartal Training and Research Hospital, Department of Radiology, İstanbul, Turkey.Bezmialem University Faculty of Medicine, Department of Orthopaedic and Traumatology, İstanbul, Turkey.

Pub Type(s)

Comparative Study
Journal Article

Language

eng

PubMed ID

26422342

Citation

Taşdemir, Zeki, et al. "Does the Anteromedial Portal Provide Clinical Superiority Compared to the Transtibial Portal in Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction in Nonprofessional Athletes in Short-term Follow-up?" Acta Orthopaedica Et Traumatologica Turcica, vol. 49, no. 5, 2015, pp. 483-91.
Taşdemir Z, Gülabi D, Sağlam F, et al. Does the anteromedial portal provide clinical superiority compared to the transtibial portal in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction in nonprofessional athletes in short-term follow-up? Acta Orthop Traumatol Turc. 2015;49(5):483-91.
Taşdemir, Z., Gülabi, D., Sağlam, F., Tokgöz Özal, S., & Elmalı, N. (2015). Does the anteromedial portal provide clinical superiority compared to the transtibial portal in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction in nonprofessional athletes in short-term follow-up? Acta Orthopaedica Et Traumatologica Turcica, 49(5), pp. 483-91. doi:10.3944/AOTT.2015.15.0016.
Taşdemir Z, et al. Does the Anteromedial Portal Provide Clinical Superiority Compared to the Transtibial Portal in Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction in Nonprofessional Athletes in Short-term Follow-up. Acta Orthop Traumatol Turc. 2015;49(5):483-91. PubMed PMID: 26422342.
* Article titles in AMA citation format should be in sentence-case
TY - JOUR T1 - Does the anteromedial portal provide clinical superiority compared to the transtibial portal in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction in nonprofessional athletes in short-term follow-up? AU - Taşdemir,Zeki, AU - Gülabi,Deniz, AU - Sağlam,Fevzi, AU - Tokgöz Özal,Safiye, AU - Elmalı,Nurzat, PY - 2015/10/1/entrez PY - 2015/10/1/pubmed PY - 2016/7/22/medline SP - 483 EP - 91 JF - Acta orthopaedica et traumatologica turcica JO - Acta Orthop Traumatol Turc VL - 49 IS - 5 N2 - OBJECTIVE: Two drilling techniques of the femoral tunnel are commonly used in anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction: through the transtibial (TT) portal or through the anteromedial (AM) portal. The aim of the present study is to investigate the radiological and clinical outcomes of arthroscopic single-bundle ACL reconstruction using AM and TT portal techniques for drilling the femoral tunnel in nonprofessional athletes. METHODS: A retrospective review was made of 44 nonprofessional athletes undergoing ACL reconstruction using AM and TT techniques between 2011-2013. The femoral tunnel clock position on axial magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and the anterior-posterior position of the tibial tunnel on sagittal-cut MRI scan were measured. Radiological femoral tunnel and tibial tunnel anterior-posterior inclination angles were assessed. At final follow-up, the Lachman test and pivot-shift test were used in the evaluation of the anterior-posterior stability of the knee and the rotational stability of the knee. For clinical and functional evaluation, the modified Cincinnati knee grading system, Lysholm knee scoring scale, and International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) form were used. RESULTS: No statistically significant difference was determined between the groups in terms of patient age, follow-up period, gender, and affected side distribution. There were 6 outliers in the TT group due to the clock face position. The mean femoral tunnel inclination angle was 31.07°±8.44° in the AM group and 19.02°±8.93° in the TT group. The tibial tunnel inclination angle was 21.08°±5.42° in the TT group and 16.58°±7.02° in the AM group. A statistically significant difference was determined between the 2 groups. No statistically significant difference was observed between the 2 groups in terms of Lachman test, pivot-shift test, Lysholm score, IKDC score, and modified Cincinnati score results. CONCLUSION: The AM technique has no clinical superiority compared to the TT technique in ACL reconstruction in nonprofessional athletes. SN - 2589-1294 UR - https://www.unboundmedicine.com/medline/citation/26422342/Does_the_anteromedial_portal_provide_clinical_superiority_compared_to_the_transtibial_portal_in_anterior_cruciate_ligament_reconstruction_in_nonprofessional_athletes_in_short_term_follow_up L2 - http://dx.doi.org/10.3944/AOTT.2015.15.0016 DB - PRIME DP - Unbound Medicine ER -