Abstract
PURPOSE: It is unclear whether femoral tunnel length and obliquity differ after transtibial and independent femoral drilling techniques of anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction. This meta-analysis therefore compared femoral tunnel length and obliquity in patients who underwent ACL reconstruction by the transtibial, anteromedial (AM) portal, and outside-in (OI) techniques.
METHODS: In accordance with PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines, all studies comparing femoral tunnel length and obliquity with various measurement tools-from direct measurement to imaging methods such as plain radiography, computed tomography, or magnetic resonance imaging-in patients who underwent reconstruction by the transtibial or independent femoral drilling (AM portal or OI) techniques were included.
RESULTS: Fourteen studies were included in the meta-analysis. The femoral tunnel length was 7.8 to 11.0 mm longer (P < .05) and coronal obliquity was 7.5° to 29.1° more vertical (P < .05) with the transtibial technique than with the AM portal or OI technique. Femoral tunnel and graft obliquity in the sagittal plane, however, did not differ significantly (P > .05).
CONCLUSIONS: ACL reconstruction using the AM portal and OI femoral drilling techniques resulted in a shorter length and greater coronal obliquity of the femoral tunnel than did the transtibial technique. However, these 3 femoral drilling techniques resulted in similar obliquities of the femoral tunnel and graft in the sagittal plane.
LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, meta-analysis.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 142-150 |
| Number of pages | 9 |
| Journal | Arthroscopy : the journal of arthroscopic & related surgery : official publication of the Arthroscopy Association of North America and the International Arthroscopy Association |
| Volume | 32 |
| Issue number | 1 |
| DOIs | |
| Publication status | Published - 2016 Jan 1 |
Fingerprint
ASJC Scopus subject areas
- Orthopedics and Sports Medicine
Cite this
Comparison of Femoral Tunnel Length and Obliquity Between Transtibial, Anteromedial Portal, and Outside-In Surgical Techniques in Single-Bundle Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction : A Meta-analysis. / Lee, Dae Hee; Kim, Hyun Jung; Ahn, Hyeong Sik; Bin, Seong Il.
In: Arthroscopy : the journal of arthroscopic & related surgery : official publication of the Arthroscopy Association of North America and the International Arthroscopy Association, Vol. 32, No. 1, 01.01.2016, p. 142-150.Research output: Contribution to journal › Article
}
TY - JOUR
T1 - Comparison of Femoral Tunnel Length and Obliquity Between Transtibial, Anteromedial Portal, and Outside-In Surgical Techniques in Single-Bundle Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction
T2 - A Meta-analysis
AU - Lee, Dae Hee
AU - Kim, Hyun Jung
AU - Ahn, Hyeong Sik
AU - Bin, Seong Il
PY - 2016/1/1
Y1 - 2016/1/1
N2 - PURPOSE: It is unclear whether femoral tunnel length and obliquity differ after transtibial and independent femoral drilling techniques of anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction. This meta-analysis therefore compared femoral tunnel length and obliquity in patients who underwent ACL reconstruction by the transtibial, anteromedial (AM) portal, and outside-in (OI) techniques.METHODS: In accordance with PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines, all studies comparing femoral tunnel length and obliquity with various measurement tools-from direct measurement to imaging methods such as plain radiography, computed tomography, or magnetic resonance imaging-in patients who underwent reconstruction by the transtibial or independent femoral drilling (AM portal or OI) techniques were included.RESULTS: Fourteen studies were included in the meta-analysis. The femoral tunnel length was 7.8 to 11.0 mm longer (P < .05) and coronal obliquity was 7.5° to 29.1° more vertical (P < .05) with the transtibial technique than with the AM portal or OI technique. Femoral tunnel and graft obliquity in the sagittal plane, however, did not differ significantly (P > .05).CONCLUSIONS: ACL reconstruction using the AM portal and OI femoral drilling techniques resulted in a shorter length and greater coronal obliquity of the femoral tunnel than did the transtibial technique. However, these 3 femoral drilling techniques resulted in similar obliquities of the femoral tunnel and graft in the sagittal plane.LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, meta-analysis.
AB - PURPOSE: It is unclear whether femoral tunnel length and obliquity differ after transtibial and independent femoral drilling techniques of anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction. This meta-analysis therefore compared femoral tunnel length and obliquity in patients who underwent ACL reconstruction by the transtibial, anteromedial (AM) portal, and outside-in (OI) techniques.METHODS: In accordance with PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines, all studies comparing femoral tunnel length and obliquity with various measurement tools-from direct measurement to imaging methods such as plain radiography, computed tomography, or magnetic resonance imaging-in patients who underwent reconstruction by the transtibial or independent femoral drilling (AM portal or OI) techniques were included.RESULTS: Fourteen studies were included in the meta-analysis. The femoral tunnel length was 7.8 to 11.0 mm longer (P < .05) and coronal obliquity was 7.5° to 29.1° more vertical (P < .05) with the transtibial technique than with the AM portal or OI technique. Femoral tunnel and graft obliquity in the sagittal plane, however, did not differ significantly (P > .05).CONCLUSIONS: ACL reconstruction using the AM portal and OI femoral drilling techniques resulted in a shorter length and greater coronal obliquity of the femoral tunnel than did the transtibial technique. However, these 3 femoral drilling techniques resulted in similar obliquities of the femoral tunnel and graft in the sagittal plane.LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, meta-analysis.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84983085009&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84983085009&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.arthro.2015.07.026
DO - 10.1016/j.arthro.2015.07.026
M3 - Article
C2 - 26422705
AN - SCOPUS:84961894396
VL - 32
SP - 142
EP - 150
JO - Arthroscopy - Journal of Arthroscopic and Related Surgery
JF - Arthroscopy - Journal of Arthroscopic and Related Surgery
SN - 0749-8063
IS - 1
ER -