Effects of higher femoral tunnels on clinical outcomes, MRI, and second-look findings in double-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction with a minimal 5-year follow-up

Abstract

Abstract Background: To perform anatomical anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR), tunnels should be placed relatively higher in the femoral anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) footprint based on the findings of direct and indirect femoral insertion. But the clinical results of higher femoral tunnels (HFT) in double-bundle ACLR (DB-ACLR) remain unclear. The purpose was to investigate the clinical results of HFT and lower femoral tunnels (LFT) in DB-ACLR. Methods: From September 2014 to February 2016, 83 patients who underwent DB-ACLR and met the inclusion and exclusion criteria were divided into HFT-ACLR (group 1, n = 37) and LFT-ACLR (group 2, n = 46) according to the position of femoral tunnels. Preoperatively and at the final follow-up, clinical scores were evaluated with International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC), Tegner activity, and Lysholm score. The stability of the knee was evaluated with KT-2000, Lachman test, and pivot-shift test. Cartilage degeneration grades of the International Cartilage Repair Society (ICRS) were evaluated on magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). Graft tension, continuity, and synovialization were evaluated by second-look arthroscopy. Return-to-sports was assessed at the final follow-up. Results: Significantly better improvement were found for KT-2000, Lachman test, and pivot-shift test postoperatively in group 1 (P >0.05). Posterolateral bundles (PL) showed significantly better results in second-look arthroscopy regarding graft tension, continuity, and synovialization (P <0.05), but not in anteromedial bundles in group 1. At the final follow-up, cartilage worsening was observed in groups 1 and 2, but it did not reach a stastistically significant difference (P >0.05). No statistically significant differences were found in IKDC subjective score, Tegner activity, and Lysholm score between the two groups. Higher return-to-sports rate was found in group 1 with 86.8% (32/37) vs. 65.2% (30/46) in group 2 (P = 0.027). Conclusion: The HFT-ACLR group showed better stability results, better PL, and higher return-to-sports rate compared to the LFT-ACLR group.