Cargando…

Poster 255: Lateral Extra-Articular Tenodesis Staple Risks Penetration of ACL Reconstruction Tunnel

OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to identify the risk of ACL femoral tunnel penetration by a small Richards staple used for Lateral Extra-Articular Tenodesis (LET) fixation and to determine whether or not the risk varies between two techniques for ACL femoral tunnel creation. METHODS: 20 pa...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Anderson, Gregory, Barras, Laurel, Graf, Ryan, Moran, Thomas, Gwathmey, F. Winston, Diduch, David, Miller, Mark, MacLean, Ian
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: SAGE Publications 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9340977/
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/2325967121S00816
_version_ 1784760515881336832
author Anderson, Gregory
Barras, Laurel
Graf, Ryan
Moran, Thomas
Gwathmey, F. Winston
Diduch, David
Miller, Mark
MacLean, Ian
author_facet Anderson, Gregory
Barras, Laurel
Graf, Ryan
Moran, Thomas
Gwathmey, F. Winston
Diduch, David
Miller, Mark
MacLean, Ian
author_sort Anderson, Gregory
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to identify the risk of ACL femoral tunnel penetration by a small Richards staple used for Lateral Extra-Articular Tenodesis (LET) fixation and to determine whether or not the risk varies between two techniques for ACL femoral tunnel creation. METHODS: 20 paired fresh frozen cadaver knees underwent ACL reconstruction with a LET using the modified Lemaire technique (Getgood et al. AJSM, Jan 2020). Left and right knees were randomized to ACL reconstruction with femoral tunnel creation by either the accessory anteromedial portal (AMP) technique or the flexible guide pin and reamer method. The femoral tunnels in the accessory AMP technique arm were created using a 7mm offset guide. Both arms used a 10mm reamer and were reamed to a depth of 25mm. After tunnel creation and prior to passing the ACL graft, the LET was performed. This was completed by harvesting an 8cm long and 10mm wide central portion of the IT band which was left attached to its distal insertion on Gerdy’s tubercle. This was routed underneath the LCL and fixed with a small Richards staple on the lateral metaphyseal flare proximal and posterior to the LCL insertion. The staple was angled anteriorly and distally. Fluoroscopy was used to obtain a lateral view of the knee to ensure appropriate position of the staple (Figure 1). Finally, tunneloscopy was performed from the anteromedial portal to investigate penetration of the staple into the femoral tunnel (Figure 2). A Fisher’s exact test was conducted to determine if there was any difference in tunnel penetration between tunnel creation techniques. RESULTS: The staple was noted to penetrate the ACL femoral tunnel in 8/20 (40%) extremities. When stratified by tunnel creation technique, the Richards staple violated 5/10 (50%) of the tunnels made via the accessory AMP technique compared to 3/10 (30%) of those created with a flexible guide pin and reamer (p = 0.65). CONCLUSIONS: Staple fixation of a LET carries significant risk of penetrating the ACL tunnel that does not vary by the technique of femoral tunnel creation. This raises concerns over the potential effect of the staple on ACL graft fixation and the ACL graft itself.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9340977
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher SAGE Publications
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-93409772022-08-02 Poster 255: Lateral Extra-Articular Tenodesis Staple Risks Penetration of ACL Reconstruction Tunnel Anderson, Gregory Barras, Laurel Graf, Ryan Moran, Thomas Gwathmey, F. Winston Diduch, David Miller, Mark MacLean, Ian Orthop J Sports Med Article OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to identify the risk of ACL femoral tunnel penetration by a small Richards staple used for Lateral Extra-Articular Tenodesis (LET) fixation and to determine whether or not the risk varies between two techniques for ACL femoral tunnel creation. METHODS: 20 paired fresh frozen cadaver knees underwent ACL reconstruction with a LET using the modified Lemaire technique (Getgood et al. AJSM, Jan 2020). Left and right knees were randomized to ACL reconstruction with femoral tunnel creation by either the accessory anteromedial portal (AMP) technique or the flexible guide pin and reamer method. The femoral tunnels in the accessory AMP technique arm were created using a 7mm offset guide. Both arms used a 10mm reamer and were reamed to a depth of 25mm. After tunnel creation and prior to passing the ACL graft, the LET was performed. This was completed by harvesting an 8cm long and 10mm wide central portion of the IT band which was left attached to its distal insertion on Gerdy’s tubercle. This was routed underneath the LCL and fixed with a small Richards staple on the lateral metaphyseal flare proximal and posterior to the LCL insertion. The staple was angled anteriorly and distally. Fluoroscopy was used to obtain a lateral view of the knee to ensure appropriate position of the staple (Figure 1). Finally, tunneloscopy was performed from the anteromedial portal to investigate penetration of the staple into the femoral tunnel (Figure 2). A Fisher’s exact test was conducted to determine if there was any difference in tunnel penetration between tunnel creation techniques. RESULTS: The staple was noted to penetrate the ACL femoral tunnel in 8/20 (40%) extremities. When stratified by tunnel creation technique, the Richards staple violated 5/10 (50%) of the tunnels made via the accessory AMP technique compared to 3/10 (30%) of those created with a flexible guide pin and reamer (p = 0.65). CONCLUSIONS: Staple fixation of a LET carries significant risk of penetrating the ACL tunnel that does not vary by the technique of femoral tunnel creation. This raises concerns over the potential effect of the staple on ACL graft fixation and the ACL graft itself. SAGE Publications 2022-07-28 /pmc/articles/PMC9340977/ http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/2325967121S00816 Text en © The Author(s) 2022 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/This open-access article is published and distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution - NonCommercial - No Derivatives License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/), which permits the noncommercial use, distribution, and reproduction of the article in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited. You may not alter, transform, or build upon this article without the permission of the Author(s). For article reuse guidelines, please visit SAGE’s website at http://www.sagepub.com/journals-permissions.
spellingShingle Article
Anderson, Gregory
Barras, Laurel
Graf, Ryan
Moran, Thomas
Gwathmey, F. Winston
Diduch, David
Miller, Mark
MacLean, Ian
Poster 255: Lateral Extra-Articular Tenodesis Staple Risks Penetration of ACL Reconstruction Tunnel
title Poster 255: Lateral Extra-Articular Tenodesis Staple Risks Penetration of ACL Reconstruction Tunnel
title_full Poster 255: Lateral Extra-Articular Tenodesis Staple Risks Penetration of ACL Reconstruction Tunnel
title_fullStr Poster 255: Lateral Extra-Articular Tenodesis Staple Risks Penetration of ACL Reconstruction Tunnel
title_full_unstemmed Poster 255: Lateral Extra-Articular Tenodesis Staple Risks Penetration of ACL Reconstruction Tunnel
title_short Poster 255: Lateral Extra-Articular Tenodesis Staple Risks Penetration of ACL Reconstruction Tunnel
title_sort poster 255: lateral extra-articular tenodesis staple risks penetration of acl reconstruction tunnel
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9340977/
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/2325967121S00816
work_keys_str_mv AT andersongregory poster255lateralextraarticulartenodesisstapleriskspenetrationofaclreconstructiontunnel
AT barraslaurel poster255lateralextraarticulartenodesisstapleriskspenetrationofaclreconstructiontunnel
AT grafryan poster255lateralextraarticulartenodesisstapleriskspenetrationofaclreconstructiontunnel
AT moranthomas poster255lateralextraarticulartenodesisstapleriskspenetrationofaclreconstructiontunnel
AT gwathmeyfwinston poster255lateralextraarticulartenodesisstapleriskspenetrationofaclreconstructiontunnel
AT diduchdavid poster255lateralextraarticulartenodesisstapleriskspenetrationofaclreconstructiontunnel
AT millermark poster255lateralextraarticulartenodesisstapleriskspenetrationofaclreconstructiontunnel
AT macleanian poster255lateralextraarticulartenodesisstapleriskspenetrationofaclreconstructiontunnel