Cargando…

Creating a Femoral Tunnel Aperture at the Anteromedial Footprint Versus the Central Footprint in ACL Reconstruction: Comparison of Contact Stress Patterns

BACKGROUND: It remains unclear whether an anteromedial (AM) footprint or a central footprint anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) graft exhibits less contact stress with the femoral tunnel aperture. This contact stress can generate graft attrition forces, which can lead to potential graft failure. PURPO...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Kim, Sung-Jae, Song, Si Young, Kim, Tae Soung, Kim, Yoon Sang, Jang, Seong-Wook, Seo, Young-Jin
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: SAGE Publications 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8111278/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33997070
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/23259671211001802
_version_ 1783690464873938944
author Kim, Sung-Jae
Song, Si Young
Kim, Tae Soung
Kim, Yoon Sang
Jang, Seong-Wook
Seo, Young-Jin
author_facet Kim, Sung-Jae
Song, Si Young
Kim, Tae Soung
Kim, Yoon Sang
Jang, Seong-Wook
Seo, Young-Jin
author_sort Kim, Sung-Jae
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: It remains unclear whether an anteromedial (AM) footprint or a central footprint anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) graft exhibits less contact stress with the femoral tunnel aperture. This contact stress can generate graft attrition forces, which can lead to potential graft failure. PURPOSE/HYPOTHESIS: The purpose of this study was to compare the difference in contact stress patterns of the graft around a femoral tunnel that is created at the anatomic AM footprint versus the central footprint. It was hypothesized that the difference in femoral tunnel positions would influence the contact stress at the interface between the reconstructed graft and the femoral tunnel orifice. STUDY DESIGN: Controlled laboratory study. METHODS: A total of 24 patients who underwent anatomic single-bundle ACL reconstruction were included in this study. In 12 patients, the femoral tunnels were created at the center of the native AM footprint (AM group), and in the remaining 12 patients the center of the femoral tunnel was placed in the anatomic central footprint (central group). Three-dimensional knee models were created and manipulated using several modeling programs, and the graft-tunnel angle (GTA) was determined using a special software program. The peak contact stresses generated on the virtual ACL graft around the femoral tunnel orifice were calculated using a finite element method. RESULTS: The mean GTA was significantly more obtuse in the AM group than in the central group (124.2° ± 5.9° vs 112.6° ± 7.9°; P = .001). In general, both groups showed high stress distribution on the anterior surface of the graft, which came in contact with the anterior aspect of the femoral tunnel aperture. The degree of stress in the central group (5.3 ± 2.6 MPa) was significantly higher than that in the AM group (1.2 ± 1.1 MPa) (P < .001). CONCLUSION: Compared with the AM footprint ACL graft, the central footprint ACL graft developed significantly higher contact stress in the extended position, especially around the anterior aspect of the femoral tunnel orifice. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: The contact stress of the ACL graft at the extended position of the knee may be minimized by creating the femoral tunnel at the AM-oriented footprint.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8111278
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher SAGE Publications
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-81112782021-05-14 Creating a Femoral Tunnel Aperture at the Anteromedial Footprint Versus the Central Footprint in ACL Reconstruction: Comparison of Contact Stress Patterns Kim, Sung-Jae Song, Si Young Kim, Tae Soung Kim, Yoon Sang Jang, Seong-Wook Seo, Young-Jin Orthop J Sports Med Article BACKGROUND: It remains unclear whether an anteromedial (AM) footprint or a central footprint anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) graft exhibits less contact stress with the femoral tunnel aperture. This contact stress can generate graft attrition forces, which can lead to potential graft failure. PURPOSE/HYPOTHESIS: The purpose of this study was to compare the difference in contact stress patterns of the graft around a femoral tunnel that is created at the anatomic AM footprint versus the central footprint. It was hypothesized that the difference in femoral tunnel positions would influence the contact stress at the interface between the reconstructed graft and the femoral tunnel orifice. STUDY DESIGN: Controlled laboratory study. METHODS: A total of 24 patients who underwent anatomic single-bundle ACL reconstruction were included in this study. In 12 patients, the femoral tunnels were created at the center of the native AM footprint (AM group), and in the remaining 12 patients the center of the femoral tunnel was placed in the anatomic central footprint (central group). Three-dimensional knee models were created and manipulated using several modeling programs, and the graft-tunnel angle (GTA) was determined using a special software program. The peak contact stresses generated on the virtual ACL graft around the femoral tunnel orifice were calculated using a finite element method. RESULTS: The mean GTA was significantly more obtuse in the AM group than in the central group (124.2° ± 5.9° vs 112.6° ± 7.9°; P = .001). In general, both groups showed high stress distribution on the anterior surface of the graft, which came in contact with the anterior aspect of the femoral tunnel aperture. The degree of stress in the central group (5.3 ± 2.6 MPa) was significantly higher than that in the AM group (1.2 ± 1.1 MPa) (P < .001). CONCLUSION: Compared with the AM footprint ACL graft, the central footprint ACL graft developed significantly higher contact stress in the extended position, especially around the anterior aspect of the femoral tunnel orifice. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: The contact stress of the ACL graft at the extended position of the knee may be minimized by creating the femoral tunnel at the AM-oriented footprint. SAGE Publications 2021-04-29 /pmc/articles/PMC8111278/ /pubmed/33997070 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/23259671211001802 Text en © The Author(s) 2021 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 4.0 License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/) which permits non-commercial use, reproduction and distribution of the work as published without adaptation or alteration, without further permission provided the original work is attributed as specified on the SAGE and Open Access pages (https://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/open-access-at-sage).
spellingShingle Article
Kim, Sung-Jae
Song, Si Young
Kim, Tae Soung
Kim, Yoon Sang
Jang, Seong-Wook
Seo, Young-Jin
Creating a Femoral Tunnel Aperture at the Anteromedial Footprint Versus the Central Footprint in ACL Reconstruction: Comparison of Contact Stress Patterns
title Creating a Femoral Tunnel Aperture at the Anteromedial Footprint Versus the Central Footprint in ACL Reconstruction: Comparison of Contact Stress Patterns
title_full Creating a Femoral Tunnel Aperture at the Anteromedial Footprint Versus the Central Footprint in ACL Reconstruction: Comparison of Contact Stress Patterns
title_fullStr Creating a Femoral Tunnel Aperture at the Anteromedial Footprint Versus the Central Footprint in ACL Reconstruction: Comparison of Contact Stress Patterns
title_full_unstemmed Creating a Femoral Tunnel Aperture at the Anteromedial Footprint Versus the Central Footprint in ACL Reconstruction: Comparison of Contact Stress Patterns
title_short Creating a Femoral Tunnel Aperture at the Anteromedial Footprint Versus the Central Footprint in ACL Reconstruction: Comparison of Contact Stress Patterns
title_sort creating a femoral tunnel aperture at the anteromedial footprint versus the central footprint in acl reconstruction: comparison of contact stress patterns
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8111278/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33997070
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/23259671211001802
work_keys_str_mv AT kimsungjae creatingafemoraltunnelapertureattheanteromedialfootprintversusthecentralfootprintinaclreconstructioncomparisonofcontactstresspatterns
AT songsiyoung creatingafemoraltunnelapertureattheanteromedialfootprintversusthecentralfootprintinaclreconstructioncomparisonofcontactstresspatterns
AT kimtaesoung creatingafemoraltunnelapertureattheanteromedialfootprintversusthecentralfootprintinaclreconstructioncomparisonofcontactstresspatterns
AT kimyoonsang creatingafemoraltunnelapertureattheanteromedialfootprintversusthecentralfootprintinaclreconstructioncomparisonofcontactstresspatterns
AT jangseongwook creatingafemoraltunnelapertureattheanteromedialfootprintversusthecentralfootprintinaclreconstructioncomparisonofcontactstresspatterns
AT seoyoungjin creatingafemoraltunnelapertureattheanteromedialfootprintversusthecentralfootprintinaclreconstructioncomparisonofcontactstresspatterns