Skip to main content
Erschienen in: Archives of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery 11/2016

20.07.2016 | Arthroscopy and Sports Medicine

A comparative analysis of arthroscopic double-bundle versus single-bundle posterior cruciate ligament reconstruction using hamstring tendon autograft

verfasst von: Vineet Jain, Ankit Goyal, Mukul Mohindra, Rahul Kumar, Deepak Joshi, Deepak Chaudhary

Erschienen in: Archives of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery | Ausgabe 11/2016

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Abstract

Purpose

Anatomically, posterior cruciate ligament (PCL) consists of two bundles, i.e. anterolateral (AL) and posteromedial (PM) bundle. Single-bundle PCL (SBPCL) reconstruction remains most popular method of reconstruction, though double-bundle PCL (DBPCL) reconstruction is more anatomical. This study was done to analyse the clinical and functional outcome after both SBPCL and DBPCL reconstructions using autologous hamstring grafts.

Methods

This was a retrospective study including patients who underwent either DBPCL or SBPCL reconstruction for chronic symptomatic PCL injury. Clinical, functional and radiological evaluation was done pre-operatively and 3 months post-operatively and thereafter at every 6-month interval. Patients with a minimum follow-up of 24 months were included in the study. Pre-operative posterior translation was quantified by manual posterior drawer, KT 1000 measurement and stress radiography. Functional outcome was done using Lysholm and IKDC scores. MRI was done in all patients.

Results

Records of 40 patients were available with minimum follow-up of 24 months. Out of these, DBPCL reconstruction was done in 18 patients and SBPCL reconstruction was done in 22 patients. Four patients in DB (double-bundle PCL reconstruction) group and five in SB (single-bundle PCL reconstruction) group had more than grade I laxity by posterior drawer and on KT 1000 measurement DB group had average side-to-side difference of 1.78 mm and SB group 2.44 mm (p value = 0.0487). On functional assessment by Lysholm and IKDC score, there was significant improvement from pre-operative values in both the groups with no significant difference between the groups post-operatively. Stress radiography revealed significantly less post-translation in DB group as compared to SB group.

Conclusion

Though DBPCL reconstruction results in less posterior laxity, there is no difference in functional outcome of SBPCL and DBPCL reconstructions.

Level of evidence

III.
Literatur
1.
Zurück zum Zitat Cooper DE, Warren RF, Warner JJP (1991) The posterior cruciate ligament and posterolateral structures of the knee anatomy, functions and pattern of injury. Instr Course Lect 40:249–270 Cooper DE, Warren RF, Warner JJP (1991) The posterior cruciate ligament and posterolateral structures of the knee anatomy, functions and pattern of injury. Instr Course Lect 40:249–270
2.
Zurück zum Zitat Fanelli GC, Beck JD, Edson CJ (2010) Current concepts review: the posterior cruciate ligament. J Knee Surg 23(2):61–72PubMedCrossRef Fanelli GC, Beck JD, Edson CJ (2010) Current concepts review: the posterior cruciate ligament. J Knee Surg 23(2):61–72PubMedCrossRef
3.
Zurück zum Zitat Deie M, Adachi N, Nakamae A, Takazawa K, Ochi M (2015) Evaluation of single-bundle versus double-bundle PCL reconstructions with more than 10-year follow up. Sci World J 2015:751465CrossRef Deie M, Adachi N, Nakamae A, Takazawa K, Ochi M (2015) Evaluation of single-bundle versus double-bundle PCL reconstructions with more than 10-year follow up. Sci World J 2015:751465CrossRef
4.
Zurück zum Zitat Wang CJ, Weng LH, Hsu CC, Chan YS (2004) Arthroscopic single versus double-bundle posterior cruciate ligament reconstructions using hamstring autograft. Injury 35:1293–1299PubMedCrossRef Wang CJ, Weng LH, Hsu CC, Chan YS (2004) Arthroscopic single versus double-bundle posterior cruciate ligament reconstructions using hamstring autograft. Injury 35:1293–1299PubMedCrossRef
5.
Zurück zum Zitat Houe T, Jorgensen U (2004) Arthroscopic posterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: one- vs. two-tunnel technique. Scand J Med Sci Sports 14:107–111PubMedCrossRef Houe T, Jorgensen U (2004) Arthroscopic posterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: one- vs. two-tunnel technique. Scand J Med Sci Sports 14:107–111PubMedCrossRef
6.
Zurück zum Zitat Fox RJ, Harner CD, Sakane M, Carlin GJ, Woo SL (1998) Determination of the in situ forces in the human posterior cruciate ligament using robotic technology. A cadaveric study. Am J Sports Med 26:395–401PubMedCrossRef Fox RJ, Harner CD, Sakane M, Carlin GJ, Woo SL (1998) Determination of the in situ forces in the human posterior cruciate ligament using robotic technology. A cadaveric study. Am J Sports Med 26:395–401PubMedCrossRef
7.
Zurück zum Zitat Butler DL, Noyes FR, Grood ES (1980) Ligamentous restraints to anterior-posterior drawer in the human knee. A biomechanical study. J Bone Joint Surg Am 62:259–270PubMed Butler DL, Noyes FR, Grood ES (1980) Ligamentous restraints to anterior-posterior drawer in the human knee. A biomechanical study. J Bone Joint Surg Am 62:259–270PubMed
8.
Zurück zum Zitat Kohen RB, Sekiya JK (2009) Single-bundle versus double-bundle posterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Arthrosc 25(12):1470–1477 Kohen RB, Sekiya JK (2009) Single-bundle versus double-bundle posterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Arthrosc 25(12):1470–1477
9.
Zurück zum Zitat Race A, Amis AA (1998) PCL reconstruction: in vitro biomechanical comparison of “isometric” versus single- and double-bundled “anatomic” grafts. J Bone Joint Surg Br 80:173–179PubMedCrossRef Race A, Amis AA (1998) PCL reconstruction: in vitro biomechanical comparison of “isometric” versus single- and double-bundled “anatomic” grafts. J Bone Joint Surg Br 80:173–179PubMedCrossRef
10.
Zurück zum Zitat Markolf KL, Feeley BT, Jackson SR, McAllister DR (2006) Biomechanical studies of double-bundle posterior cruciate ligament reconstructions. J Bone Joint Surg Am 88:1788–1794PubMedCrossRef Markolf KL, Feeley BT, Jackson SR, McAllister DR (2006) Biomechanical studies of double-bundle posterior cruciate ligament reconstructions. J Bone Joint Surg Am 88:1788–1794PubMedCrossRef
11.
Zurück zum Zitat Bergfeld JA, Graham SM, Parker RD, Valdevit AD, Kambic HE (2005) A biomechanical comparison of posterior cruciate ligament reconstructions using single- and double-bundle tibial inlay techniques. Am J Sports Med 33:976–981PubMedCrossRef Bergfeld JA, Graham SM, Parker RD, Valdevit AD, Kambic HE (2005) A biomechanical comparison of posterior cruciate ligament reconstructions using single- and double-bundle tibial inlay techniques. Am J Sports Med 33:976–981PubMedCrossRef
12.
Zurück zum Zitat Mannor DA, Shearn JT, Grood ES, Noyes FR, Levy MS (2000) Two-bundle posterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. An in vitro analysis of graft placement and tension. Am J Sports Med 28:833–845PubMed Mannor DA, Shearn JT, Grood ES, Noyes FR, Levy MS (2000) Two-bundle posterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. An in vitro analysis of graft placement and tension. Am J Sports Med 28:833–845PubMed
13.
Zurück zum Zitat Yoon HK, Bae DK, Song Sang, Jun Cho H, Lee Hwan (2011) A prospective randomized study comparing arthroscopic single-bundle and double-bundle posterior cruciate ligament reconstructions preserving remnant fibers. Am J Sports Med 39:474–481PubMedCrossRef Yoon HK, Bae DK, Song Sang, Jun Cho H, Lee Hwan (2011) A prospective randomized study comparing arthroscopic single-bundle and double-bundle posterior cruciate ligament reconstructions preserving remnant fibers. Am J Sports Med 39:474–481PubMedCrossRef
14.
Zurück zum Zitat Becker R, Ropke M, Nebelung W (1999) Clinical outcome of arthroscopic posterior cruciate ligament-plasty. Unfallchirurg 102:354–358PubMedCrossRef Becker R, Ropke M, Nebelung W (1999) Clinical outcome of arthroscopic posterior cruciate ligament-plasty. Unfallchirurg 102:354–358PubMedCrossRef
Metadaten
Titel
A comparative analysis of arthroscopic double-bundle versus single-bundle posterior cruciate ligament reconstruction using hamstring tendon autograft
verfasst von
Vineet Jain
Ankit Goyal
Mukul Mohindra
Rahul Kumar
Deepak Joshi
Deepak Chaudhary
Publikationsdatum
20.07.2016
Verlag
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Erschienen in
Archives of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery / Ausgabe 11/2016
Print ISSN: 0936-8051
Elektronische ISSN: 1434-3916
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00402-016-2512-y

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 11/2016

Archives of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery 11/2016 Zur Ausgabe

Arthropedia

Grundlagenwissen der Arthroskopie und Gelenkchirurgie. Erweitert durch Fallbeispiele, Videos und Abbildungen. 
» Jetzt entdecken

Update Orthopädie und Unfallchirurgie

Bestellen Sie unseren Fach-Newsletter und bleiben Sie gut informiert.