No abstract

PURPOSE OF THE STUDYThe aim of the study is to present a comparison of short-term results of double-versus single-bundle anatomical reconstruction of the anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) using hamstring endons and their fixation with absorbable interference screws. MATERIAL AnD METHODSA total of 110 patients with an isolated ACL lesion and the healthy contralateral knee who met the indication criteria for ACL double bundle reconstruction (TISL, 14 mm; ICnW, 12 mm) were intra-operatively allocated at random to either double-bundle group (DB, n=55) or single-bundle group (SB, n=55). At 12 months after surgery, 97 patients (DB group, n=49; SB group, n=48), comprising 68 men and 29 women, were evaluated; the average age was 29.1 years and the injury-to-surgery interval was 15.9 weeks. Pre-and post-operative subjective criteria involved the IKDC and Lysholm score. Objectively, the occurrence of graft failure, range of motion deficit, return to pre-injury sports activity, side-to-side difference in anterior laxity of both knees in 20° flexion on a GnRB laximeter at an applied pressure of 124 n and 250 n, and pivot shift phenomenon were assessed. RESULTSno statistically significant difference was found in pre-operative values between the two groups. Post-operatively, there were no significant differences in the occurrence of complete graft failure (p=0.0755; DB group, n=0; SB group, n=3), rangeof-motion deficit (p=0.2277-0.9788) or return to pre-operative sports activity (p=0.2322). In the DB group, side-to-side anterior tibial shifts at a pressure of 124 n (medians=1.3 mm and 2.1 mm for DB and SB groups, respectively; p=0.0007) and at a pressure of 250 n (DB group =2.1 mm; SB group = 3.1 mm; p<0.0001) were significantly different from the corresponding values in the SB group. Positive results for the pivot shift test (PST) were significantly less frequent in the DB than the SB group (Chi-square test =0.0112). The SB group patients had a 2.9-times (odds ratio, 2.8704) higher risk of positive postoperative PST results than the DB group patients. In both groups, a comparison of pre-and post-operative criteria showed significant improvement in both the subjective and the objective results. DISCUSSIOnThe results of this study, in accordance with other authors' conclusions, suggest that the double-bundle technique provides better control over rotational and anterior knee laxity and therefore restores knee biomechanics better. However, other literature data do not confirm any significantly better outcomes of this method. Since only short-term results have been obtained so far, the study will continue because only the long-term results can provide conclusive evidence of an advantage of one technique over the other. COnCLUSIOnSOur study showed significantly better restoration of knee rotational and anterior laxity in the patients undergoing anatomical reconstruction of the ACL by the double-bundle technique. The other evaluated criteria did not differ in relation to the technique used.

PURPOSE OF THE STUDYThe aim of the study was to compare two options of how to get the correct anatomical position of both femoral tunnels, using the transtibial or the anteromedial portal technique, during anatomical double-bundle anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction. MATERIAL AND METHODSA total of 36 patients, 29 men and seven women, underwent double-bundle ACL reconstruction between October 2009 and December 2010. Their average age was 26.5 years. The average interval between ACL injury and reconstruction was 7.4 months. A diagnostic arthroscopy for the treatment of cartilage and meniscal lesions was performed in 21 patients and one-stage ACL reconstruction with diagnostic arthroscopy was carried out in the remaining 15 patients.In all 36 patients, the position of the tip of the guide wire in relation to the anatomical insertion sites of both the anteromedial (AM) and posterolateral (PL) bundles was assessed intra-operatively. Three guide wire positions were found: the tip was in the centre of the native insertion site, the tip was within the insertion site but not in its centre, and the tip was outside the insertion site. RESULTSUsing the transtibial technique through the AM tunnels, the tip of the guide wire was centred within the femoral AM insertion site only in one patient (2.8%), out of the centre but within the AM insertion site in four patients (11.1%) and outside the insertion site in the remaining 31 patients (86.1%). With this technique, the position of the femoral PL tunnels was outside the native PL insertion site in all 36 patients.With the transtibial technique using the PL tunnels, the tip of the guide wire was centred within the femoral AM native insertion in 11 patients (30.5%), out of the centre but still within the AM insertion site in 16 (44.5%) and outside the AM insertion site in nine patients (25%). Aiming for the femoral PL tunnel resulted in the tip of the guide wire being outside the native femoral PL insertion site in all cases.Using the technique of guide wire insertion through an accessory AM portal it was possible to achieve the centres of both the AM and PL native anatomical insertion sites in all 36 patients (100%). DISCUSSIONWe agree with the many authors who recommend the reaming of PL femoral tunnels through an accessory AM portal because the transtibial technique does not allow for the placement of their precise native anatomical positions. Our intraoperative findings showed that the transtibial technique was effective to get the correct anatomical position of AM femoral tunnels just in 30.5% of the patients. In view of the fact that the same results can be achieved with the AM transportal technique in 100% of the patients, we prefer this technique in accordance with the majority of other authors. CONCLUSIONSIn anatomical double-bundle ACL reconstruction, the native anatomical position of PL tunnels was achieved in all patients and the native AM tunnels in most of them using the accessory AM portal technique. The transtibial technique proved to be unsatisfactory.

PURPOSE OF THE STUDYSince 2000 arthroscopically-assisted surgery on hip joints has become more widely used. The technique is relatively demanding and should be used only after arthroscopic procedures on other large joints are mastered to perfection. A thorough study on cadaverous specimens should be a prerequisite for adopting it as a routine method. The aim of this study was to evaluate indications for hip arthroscopy as, from the year 2006, this was gradually introduced and more widely used at our department. MATERIAL AND METHODSForty-two hip joints were assessed out of the 83 hips which had been treated by arthroscopic surgery before the date of evaluation and which had been followed up for at least 2 years. The patient group evaluated consisted of 25 men and 17 women, with an average age of 40.3 years and a range of 21 to 65 years. Patients with a follow-up shorter than 2 years and those subsequently undergoing total hip arthroplasty were not evaluated. Indications for arthroscopic surgery included the presence of intra-articular bodies, labro-cartilaginous lesions and impingement syndromes. Neurovascular disorder affecting the limb and a higher degree of osteoporosis were considered contraindications. The outcome of surgery and its indications were evaluated on the basis of the questionnaire which recorded the patient's objective findings and subjective feelings at 3 and 6 months and then at 1 and 2 years after surgery. RESULTSThe average VAS score was 7.83 points before surgery, and 3.87 points at 3 months and 2.01 points at 2 years after surgery. Nearly all patients (98%) reported their willingness to undergo the surgery again. The complications included transient hyperesthesia in the perineal region completely resolved within 4 weeks of surgery in three cases and subcutaneous extravasation after extensive capsulotomy in one patient. It subsided within 48 hours without compartment syndrome development. DISCUSSIONA good view allowing for comprehensive exploration of the central as well as peripheral compartments enables us to treat all pathologies, which are manageable by arthroscopic intervention, in one procedure. Patient recovery is faster and the risk of intra-and post-operative complications is lower that in open surgery. The avoidance of extensive capsulotomy and the possibility of leaving the femoral head in place with only minimum distractions and without injury to the ligamentum capitis are the most important advantages of this method. Complications were found in 8.4% of the cases, which is in agreement with the literature data. The method can be applied in both the diagnosis and therapy of chronic conditions such as femoroacetabular impingement, as well as in the treatment of post-traumatic conditions ranging from traumatic labral lesions to the correction of incongruence of articular surfaces in acetabular fractures. CONCLUSIONSArthroscopically-assisted surgery enables us to achieve very good results, but requires appropriate, high-standard facilities and a well-mastered operative technique. It s...

No abstract