A Novel Predictor of the Length and Size of ACL Grafts in Chinese Han Adults for ACL Reconstruction: An MRI Study
Qingjun Yang, Wenqian Lu, Yong Luo, Jiatong Li, Xiancheng Huang, Tian You
A Novel Predictor of the Length and Size of ACL Grafts in Chinese Han Adults for ACL Reconstruction: An MRI Study
Objective:: Currently, there is no simple and valid method to predict the length and size of the native anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) in each adult patient who will undergo ACL reconstruction. This study aimed to develop an imaging prediction method that can predict the length and size of ACL grafts using the intact posterior cruciate ligament (PCL), in order to enhance the graft preparation individualized sizing.
Methods:: Three hundred and nineteen patients aged 18 years or older who underwent magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) of the knee at an orthopaedic clinic between September 9, 2021, and February 5, 2023, were included. The length, sagittal diameter, and coronal diameter of the ACL and PCL were measured in all patients, and F-test were performed to explore linear relationship between ligament measurements.
Results:: Equations were established to predict a variable of the native ACL for the corresponding variable of the intact PCL (i.e., sagittal diameter of the ACL = 4.32 + 1.08 × sagittal diameter of the PCL, and coronal diameter of the ACL = 2.45 + 0.59 × coronal diameter of the PCL, length of the male ACL = 10.92 + 0.64 × length of the male PCL, length of the female ACL = 11.76 + 0.58 × length of the female PCL) (R2 = 0.532; R2 = 0.417; R2 = 0.488; R2 = 0.509; respectively).
Conclusions:: The length and size of the intact PCL in cases without PCL buckling are predictors of the length and size of the native ACL in adults, respectively. The use of this information to optimize graft diameter may lower the rates of ACL graft failure in the future.
Anatomic Reconstruction / Anterior Cruciate Ligament / Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction / Knee / Magnetic Resonance Imaging / Posterior Cruciate Ligament
[1] |
Granan LP, Bahr R, Steindal K, Furnes O, Engebretsen L. Development of a national cruciate ligament surgery registry: the Norwegian national knee ligament registry. Am J Sports Med. 2008;36:308–315.
CrossRef
Google scholar
|
[2] |
Kaeding CC, Léger-St-Jean B, Magnussen RA. Epidemiology and diagnosis of anterior cruciate ligament injuries. Clin Sports Med. 2017;36:1–8.
CrossRef
Google scholar
|
[3] |
Musahl V, Karlsson J. Anterior cruciate ligament tear. N Engl J Med. 2019;380:2341–2348.
CrossRef
Google scholar
|
[4] |
Kaplan DJ, Jazrawi LM. Secondary stabilizers of tibial rotation in the intact and anterior cruciate ligament deficient knee. Clin Sports Med. 2018;37:49–59.
CrossRef
Google scholar
|
[5] |
Ishibashi Y, Adachi N, Koga H, Kondo E, Kuroda R, Mae T, et al. Japanese orthopaedic association (JOA) clinical practice guidelines on the management of anterior cruciate ligament injury-secondary publication. J Orthop Sci. 2020;25:6–45.
CrossRef
Google scholar
|
[6] |
Filbay SR, Culvenor AG, Ackerman IN, Russell TG, Crossley KM. Quality of life in anterior cruciate ligament-deficient individuals: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Br J Sports Med. 2015;49:1033–1041.
CrossRef
Google scholar
|
[7] |
Filbay SR, Ackerman IN, Russell TG, Macri EM, Crossley KM. Health-related quality of life after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a systematic review. Am J Sports Med. 2014;42:1247–1255.
CrossRef
Google scholar
|
[8] |
Wang LJ, Zeng N, Yan ZP, Li JT, Ni GX. Post-traumatic osteoarthritis following ACL injury. Arthritis Res Ther. 2020;22:57.
CrossRef
Google scholar
|
[9] |
Lie MM, Risberg MA, Storheim K, Engebretsen L, Øiestad BE. What's the rate of knee osteoarthritis 10 years after anterior cruciate ligament injury? An updated systematic review. Br J Sports Med. 2019;53:1162–1167.
CrossRef
Google scholar
|
[10] |
Haraldsdottir K, Watson AM. Psychosocial impacts of sports-related injuries in adolescent athletes. Curr Sports Med Rep. 2021;20:104–108.
CrossRef
Google scholar
|
[11] |
Kvist J, Silbernagel KG. Fear of movement and reinjury in sports medicine: relevance for rehabilitation and return to sport. Phys Ther. 2022;102:pzab272.
CrossRef
Google scholar
|
[12] |
Truong LK, Mosewich AD, Holt CJ, Le CY, Miciak M, Whittaker JL. Psychological, social and contextual factors across recovery stages following a sport-related knee injury: a scoping review. Br J Sports Med. 2020;54:1149–1156.
CrossRef
Google scholar
|
[13] |
Filbay S, Kvist J. Fear of reinjury following surgical and nonsurgical management of anterior cruciate ligament injury: an exploratory analysis of the NACOX multicenter longitudinal cohort study. Phys Ther. 2022;102:pzab273.
CrossRef
Google scholar
|
[14] |
Chang CB, Yoo JH, Chung BJ, Seong SC, Kim TK. Oblique femoral tunnel placement can increase risks of short femoral tunnel and cross-pin protrusion in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Am J Sports Med. 2010;38(6):1237–1245.
CrossRef
Google scholar
|
[15] |
Robin BN, Jani SS, Marvil SC, Reid JB, Schillhammer CK, Lubowitz JH. Advantages and disadvantages of Transtibial, anteromedial portal, and outside-in femoral tunnel Drilling in Single-Bundle Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: a systematic review. Art Ther. 2015;31(7):1412–1417.
CrossRef
Google scholar
|
[16] |
Loucas M, Loucas R, D'Ambrosi R, Hantes ME. Clinical and radiological outcomes of anteromedial portal versus Transtibial technique in ACL reconstruction: a systematic review. Orthop J Sports Med. 2021;9(7):23259671211024591.
CrossRef
Google scholar
|
[17] |
Trofa DP, Saltzman BM, Corpus KT, Connor PM, Fleischli JE, Piasecki DP. A hybrid Transtibial technique combines the advantages of anteromedial portal and Transtibial approaches: a prospective randomized controlled trial. Am J Sports Med. 2020;48(13):3200–3207.
CrossRef
Google scholar
|
[18] |
Jennings JK, Leas DP, Fleischli JE, D'Alessandro DF, Peindl RD, Piasecki DP. Transtibial versus anteromedial portal ACL reconstruction: is a hybrid approach the best? Orthop J Sports Med. 2017;5:2325967117719857.
CrossRef
Google scholar
|
[19] |
Saltzman BM, Wang S, Habet NA, Hong IS, Trofa DP, Meade JD, et al. The hybrid Transtibial technique for femoral tunnel Drilling in Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: a finite element analysis model of graft bending angles and peak graft stresses in comparison with Transtibial and anteromedial portal techniques. J Am Acad Orthop Surg. 2022;30(18):e1195–e1206.
CrossRef
Google scholar
|
[20] |
Johnston TR, Hu J, Gregory B, Liles J, Riboh J. Transphyseal anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction using hybrid Transtibial femoral drilling and a quadriceps tendon autograft. Arthrosc Tech. 2020;9(8):e1121–e1131.
CrossRef
Google scholar
|
[21] |
Bodkin SG, Hertel J, Diduch DR, Saliba SA, Novicoff WM, Brockmeier SF, et al. Predicting anterior cruciate ligament reinjury from return-to-activity assessments at 6 months postsurgery: a prospective cohort study. J Athl Train. 2022;57:325–333.
CrossRef
Google scholar
|
[22] |
Filbay SR, Roos EM, Frobell RB, Roemer F, Ranstam J, Lohmander LS. Delaying ACL reconstruction and treating with exercise therapy alone may alter prognostic factors for 5-year outcome: an exploratory analysis of the KANON trial. Br J Sports Med. 2017;51:1622–1629.
CrossRef
Google scholar
|
[23] |
Head PL, Kasser R, Appling S, Cappaert T, Singhal K, Zucker-Levin A. Anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction and dynamic stability at time of release for return to sport. Phys Ther Sport. 2019;38:80–86.
CrossRef
Google scholar
|
[24] |
Jochimsen KN, Pelton MR, Mattacola CG, Huston LJ, Reinke EK, Spindler KP, et al. Relationship between pain catastrophizing and 6-month outcomes following anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. J Sport Rehabil. 2020;29:808–812.
CrossRef
Google scholar
|
[25] |
Alomar AZ, Nasser ASB, Kumar A, Kumar M, Das S, Mittal S. Hamstring graft diameter above 7 mm has a lower risk of failure following anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2022;30:288–297.
CrossRef
Google scholar
|
[26] |
Shen X, Qin Y, Zuo J, Liu T, Xiao J. A systematic review of risk factors for anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction failure. Int J Sports Med. 2021;42:682–693.
CrossRef
Google scholar
|
[27] |
Thwin L, Ho SW, Tan TJL, Lim WY, Lee KT. Pre-operative MRI measurements versus anthropometric data: which is more accurate in predicting 4-stranded hamstring graft size in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction? Asia Pac J Sports Med Arthrosc Rehabil Technol. 2020;22:5–9.
CrossRef
Google scholar
|
[28] |
Dhawan A, Gallo RA, Lynch SA. Anatomic tunnel placement in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. J Am Acad Orthop Surg. 2016;24:443–454.
CrossRef
Google scholar
|
[29] |
Heath DM, Nguyen AV, Bullock TS, Ornell SS, Bartush KC, Hogue GD. Intact PCL is a potential predictor of ACL graft size in the skeletally immature knee and other anatomic considerations for ACL reconstruction. J Exp Orthop. 2022;9:6.
CrossRef
Google scholar
|
[30] |
Leiter J, Elkurbo M, McRae S, Chiu J, Froese W, MacDonald P. Using pre-operative MRI to predict intraoperative hamstring graft size for anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2017;25:229–235.
CrossRef
Google scholar
|
[31] |
Su AW, Storey EP, Lin SC, Forst B, Lawrence JT, Ganley TJ, et al. Association of the Graft Size and Arthrofibrosis in young patients after primary anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. J Am Acad Orthop Surg. 2018;26(23):e483–e489.
CrossRef
Google scholar
|
[32] |
Kittl C, Halewood C, Stephen JM, Gupte CM, Weiler A, Williams A, et al. Length change patterns in the lateral extra-articular structures of the knee and related reconstructions. Am J Sports Med. 2015;43(2):354–362.
CrossRef
Google scholar
|
[33] |
Cone SG, Howe D, Fisher MB. Size and shape of the human anterior cruciate ligament and the impact of sex and skeletal growth: a systematic review. JBJS Rev. 2019;7:e8.
CrossRef
Google scholar
|
[34] |
Hosseinzadeh S, Kiapour AM. Age-related changes in ACL morphology during skeletal growth and maturation are different between females and males. J Orthop Res. 2021;39:841–849.
CrossRef
Google scholar
|
/
〈 | 〉 |