Both techniques facilitated good clinical results in combination with absorbable cement augmentation. In particular, the VBS enabled us to benefit from the advantages of the resorbable isothermic CaP cement with an improved radiological outcome in the long term compared to BKP. However, there was a mentionable loss of reduction in the follow-up in both groups compared to previously published data with PMMA cement. These slides can be retrieved under Electronic Supplementary Material.

Purpose Anatomic tunnel placement in ACL reconstruction is crucial to restore knee function. The aims of this study were to (i) evaluate the accuracy of tunnel placement for primary state-of-the-art ACL reconstruction, and (ii) examine the correlation between incorrect tunnel placement, graft appearance, and notch impingement. Methods In this retrospective study, all patients underwent primary single-bundle ACL reconstruction with independent drilling of the femoral and tibial tunnels according to anatomical landmarks. The accuracy of tunnel placement and the rate of notch impingement were analysed with MRI. The study cohort was subdivided according to the morphology of the graft: intact, degeneration, and re-rupture. The objective outcome was evaluated with the IKDC objective score, and the subjective outcomes were evaluated with the IKDC subjective score, the Lysholm knee score, the KOOS, and the Tegner activity scale score. Results Eighty-seven consecutive patients with a mean follow-up of 3.8 ± 1.4 years were evaluated. There was no signiicant diference among the groups concerning the baseline characteristics. The re-rupture rate was 9.2%. The position of the femoral tunnel was correct in 92% of the patients, and the position of the tibial tunnel was correct in 93% of the patients. In the intact group, impingement was not found in any of the cases, whereas the rate of impingement in the degeneration (65%) and re-rupture (80%) groups was signiicantly higher than that in the intact group (p < 0.001). The risk of impingement was more likely with femoral (71% vs. 13%, p < 0.001) or tibial (100% vs. 11%, p < 0.001) malpositioning. The objective IKDC score was A in 52 patients (60%), B in 26 patients (30%), and C in 9 patients (10%). The average subjective IKDC score, Lysholm score, and KOOS were comparable in the intact and degeneration groups but signiicantly lower in the patient group with newly diagnosed re-ruptures (p = 0.05). The Tegner activity scale score was comparable in all three groups. Conclusion Even though the accuracy of femoral tunnel placement in modern single-bundle ACL reconstruction is greater, the risk of malpositioning and graft impingement remains. In our patient cohort, there was a clear correlation between ACL graft impingement, degenerative changes in MRI, and incorrect tunnel positioning. The surgeon must focus on accurate tunnel placement speciic to individual patient anatomy. Level of evidence Level III.

Background Cortical suspensory fixation (CSF) devices gain more and more popularity as a reliable alternative to interference screws for graft fixation in anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction. Adjustable-loop fixation may be associated with increased anterior laxity and inferior clinical outcome. The purpose of the study was to compare anterior laxity and clinical outcome after minimally invasive all-inside ACL reconstruction using an adjustable-loop (AL) to a standard technique with a fixed-loop (FL) CSF device. Methods Patients who underwent primary single-bundle ACL reconstruction with a quadrupled hamstring autograft at a single institution between 2012 and 2016 were reviewed. In the AL group minimally invasive popliteal tendon harvesting was performed with an all-inside approach (femoral and tibial sockets). In the FL group a traditional anteromedial approach was used for tendon harvesting and a femoral socket and full tibial tunnel were drilled. An objective clinical assessment was performed with Telos x-rays and the International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) Objective Score. Patient-reported outcomes (PRO) included the IKDC Subjective Score, the Lysholm Knee Score, the Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Score (KOOS) and the Tegner Activity Scale. Results A total of 67 patients were enrolled in this retrospective study with a mean follow-up of 4 (± 1.5) years. The groups were homogenous at baseline regarding age, gender, and the time to surgery. At follow-up, no statistically significant differences were found regarding anterior laxity (AL: 2.3 ± 3 mm vs. FL: 2.3 ± 2.6 mm, p = 0.981). PRO scores were comparable between the AL and FL groups (IKDC score, 84.8 vs. 88.8, p = 0.185; Lysholm 87.3 vs. 89.9, p = 0.380; KOOS 90.7 vs. 91.4, p = 0.720; Tegner 5.5 vs. 6.2, p = 0.085). The rate of saphenous nerve lesions was significantly lower in the AL group with popliteal harvesting of the tendon (8.3% vs. 35.5%, p = 0.014). Conclusion The use of an adjustable-loop device on the femoral and tibial side led to similar stability and clinical results compared to a fixed-loop device.

Background: Cortical suspensory fixation (CSF) devices gain more and more popularity as a reliable alternative to interference screws for graft fixation in anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction. Adjustable-loop fixation may be associated with increased anterior laxity and inferior clinical outcome. The purpose of the study was to compare anterior laxity and clinical outcome after minimally invasive all-inside ACL reconstruction using an adjustable-loop (AL) to a standard technique with a fixed-loop (FL) CSF device.Methods: Patients who underwent primary single-bundle ACL reconstruction with a quadrupled hamstring autograft at a single institution between 2012 and 2016 were reviewed. In the AL group minimally invasive popliteal tendon harvesting was performed with an all-inside approach (femoral and tibial sockets). In the FL group a traditional anteromedial approach was used for tendon harvesting and a femoral socket and full tibial tunnel were drilled. An objective clinical assessment was performed with Telos x-rays and the International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) Objective Score. Patient-reported outcomes (PRO) included the IKDC Subjective Score, the Lysholm Knee Score, the Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Score (KOOS) and the Tegner Activity Scale.Results: A total of 67 patients were enrolled in this retrospective study with a mean follow-up of 4 (± 1.5) years. The groups were homogenous at baseline regarding age, gender, and the time to surgery. At follow-up, no statistically significant differences were found regarding anterior laxity (AL: 2.3 ± 3 mm vs. FL: 2.3 ± 2.6 mm, p=0.981). PRO scores were comparable between the AL and FL groups (IKDC score, 84.8 vs 88.8, p=0.185; Lysholm 87.3 vs 89.9, p=0.380; KOOS 90.7 vs 91.4, p=0.720; Tegner 5.5 vs 6.2, p=0.085). The rate of saphenous nerve lesions was significantly lower in the AL group with popliteal harvesting of the tendon (8.3% vs 35.5%, p=0.014).Conclusion: The use of an adjustable-loop device on the femoral and tibial side led to similar stability and clinical results compared to a fixed-loop device.