Posterior cruciate ligament reconstruction using a new arthroscopic tibial inlay double-bundle technique

Sports Medicine and Arthroscopy Review

Volumn 15, Issue 4, 2007, Pages 176-183

  Jordan, Susan S ^a   Campbell, Robert Brick ^b   Sekiya, Jon K ^c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH   (United States)

^b Virginia Institute for Sports Medicine   (United States)

^c UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN   (United States)

Author keywords

Arthroscopic transtibial; Double bundle; Posterior cruciate ligament; Reconstruction; Single bundle; Tibial inlay

Indexed keywords

ARTHROSCOPIC SURGERY; BONE PATELLAR TENDON BONE GRAFT; CADAVER; CAPSULOTOMY; DOUBLE BUNDLE TECHNIQUE; HUMAN; INCISION; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; POSTERIOR CRUCIATE LIGAMENT RECONSTRUCTION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; REVIEW; SINGLE BUNDLE TECHNIQUE; SURGICAL TECHNIQUE; TIBIAL INLAY TECHNIQUE; TRANSTIBIAL TUNNEL TECHNIQUE; ALLOTRANSPLANTATION; ARTHROSCOPY; CONVALESCENCE; FEMALE; GRAFT SURVIVAL; INJURY; INJURY SCALE; JOINT CHARACTERISTICS AND FUNCTIONS; KNEE INJURY; KNEE LIGAMENT; MALE; METHODOLOGY; PHYSIOLOGY; PLASTIC SURGERY; PROGNOSIS; RISK ASSESSMENT; SPORTS MEDICINE; SUTURING METHOD; TENSILE STRENGTH; TIBIA;

ARTHROSCOPY; BONE-PATELLAR TENDON-BONE GRAFT; FEMALE; GRAFT SURVIVAL; HUMANS; INJURY SEVERITY SCORE; KNEE INJURIES; MALE; POSTERIOR CRUCIATE LIGAMENT; PROGNOSIS; RANGE OF MOTION, ARTICULAR; RECONSTRUCTIVE SURGICAL PROCEDURES; RECOVERY OF FUNCTION; RISK ASSESSMENT; SPORTS MEDICINE; SUTURE TECHNIQUES; TENSILE STRENGTH; TIBIA; TRANSPLANTATION, HOMOLOGOUS;

EID: 38449088445     PISSN: 10628592     EISSN: 15381951     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/JSA.0b013e3181595b95     Document Type: Review

References (18)

1. Handy MH, Blessey PB, Kline AJ, et al. The graft/tunnel angles in posterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a cadaveric comparison of two techniques for femoral tunnel placement. Arthroscopy. 2005;21:711-714.
2. McAllister DR, Markolf KL, Oakes DA, et al. A biomechanical comparison of tibial inlay and tibial tunnel posterior cruciate ligament reconstruction techniques. Am J Sports Med. 2002;30:312-317.
3. Bergfeld JA, McAllister DR, Parker RD, et al. A biomechanical comparison of posterior cruciate ligament techniques. Am J Sports Med. 2001;29:129-136.
4. Markolf KL, Zemenovic JR, McAllister DR. Cyclic loading of posterior cruciate ligament replacements with tibial tunnel and tibial inlay methods. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2002;84:518-524.
5. Miller MD, Kline AJ, Gonzales J, et al. Vascular risk associated with a posterior approach for posterior cruciate ligament reconstruction using the tibial inlay technique. J Knee Surg. 2002;15:137-140.
6. Ahn JH, Yang HS, Jeong WK, et al. Arthroscopic transtibial posterior cruciate ligament reconstruction with preservation of posterior cruciate ligament fibers. Am J Sports Med. 2006;34:194-204.
7. Seon JK, Song EK. Reconstruction of isolated posterior cruciate ligament injuries: a clinical comparison of the transtibial and tibial inlay techniques. Arthroscopy. 2006;22:27-32.
8. Margheritini F, Mauro CS, Rihn JA, et al. Biomechanical comparison of tibial inlay versus transtibial techniques for posterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: analysis of knee kinematics and graft in situ forces. Am J Sports Med. 2004;32:587-593.
9. Sekiya JK, West RV, Ong BC, et al. Clinical outcomes after isolated arthroscopic single-bundle posterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Arthroscopy. 2005;21:1042-1050.
10. Harner CD, Janaushek MA, Kanamori A, et al. Biomechanical analysis of a double-bundle posterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Am J Sports Med. 2000;28:144-151.
11. Sekiya JK, Kurtz CA, Carr DR. Transtibial and tibial inlay double-bundle posterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: surgical technique using a bifid bone-patellar tendon- bone allograft. Arthroscopy. 2004;20:1095-1100.
12. Whiddon DR, Sekiya JK. Double-bundle posterior cruciate ligament reconstruction with a bifid bone-patellar tendon-bone allograft. Oper Tech Sports Med. 2005;13:233-240.
13. Mariani PP, Margheritini F. Full arthroscopic inlay reconstruction of posterior cruciate ligament. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2006. Epub ahead of print September 8, 2006.
14. Kim SJ, Park IS. Arthroscopic reconstruction of the posterior cruciate ligament using tibial-inlay and double-bundle technnique. Arthroscopy. 2005;21:1271.e1-1271.e6.
15. Markholf KL, Feeley BT, Jackson SR, et al. Biomechanical studies of double-bundle posterior cruciate ligament reconstructions. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2006;88:1788-1794.
16. Race A, Amis A. PCL reconstruction: in vitro biomechanical comparison of isometric versus single and double-bundled anatomic grafts. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1998;80-B:173-179.
17. Campbell RB, Torrie A, Hecker AT, et al. Comparison of graft fixation between an all-arthroscopic and open tibial inlay technique for PCL reconstruction. Am J Sports Med. [Epub ahead of print June 6, 2007.]
18. Zehms CT, Whiddon DR, Miller MD, et al. Comparison of a Double Bundle Arthroscopic Inlay and Open Inlay PCL Reconstruction Using Clinically Relevant Tools. Hershey, PA: American Orthopaedic Society for Sports Medicine; 2006.