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...
Autores principales: | , , , , , |
---|---|
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 |