• Journal of the Korean Arthroscopy Society
• /
• v.15 no.2
• /
• pp.132-139
• /
• 2011

The concept of double-bundle ACL reconstruction was introduced recently to restore the anatomical and biomechanical functions of the native ACL. According to anatomical and biomechanical studies, the separate reconstruction of anteromedial and posterolateral bundle expect to increase the overall postoperative stability and clinical results compared to single-bundle ACL reconstruction. But there is still a lack of available clinical outcome studies with sufficient follow-up to demonstrate the real advantages of double-bundle ACL reconstruction. The purpose of this article is to review the evidence to support double-bundle technique and to address controversies existing over the usefulness of this technique.

• Journal of the Korean Arthroscopy Society
• /
• v.17 no.1
• /
• pp.18-23
• /
• 2013

Purpose: The purpose of this study is to evaluate the usefulness of anatomical single bundle anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction using outside-in technique by clinical outcome analysis. Materials and Methods: From July 2009 to July 2010, 41 cases of single bundle ACL reconstruction using outside-in technique which were followed minimum 1 year were enrolled. Clinical results were evaluated using International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) subjective knee evaluation score, Lysholm score, pivot shift test, one leg hop test, KT-1000 arthrometer test, Telos stress arthrometer test. Results: IKDC subjective knee score and Lysholm score were improved to $86.1{\pm}2.1$ and $91.2{\pm}3.8$ postoperatively (p<0.0001 and p<0.0001, respectively). KT-1000 arthrometer test and Telos stress arthrometer test also were improved to $2.2{\pm}0.9\;mm$ and $2.3{\pm}1.2\;mm$ (p<0.0001 and p<0.0001, respectively). Pivot shift test and one leg hop test revealed good results. Conclusion: Anatomical single bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction using outside-in technique showed good clinical results, so it was considered available method.

• Journal of the Korean Arthroscopy Society
• /
• v.13 no.2
• /
• pp.111-114
• /
• 2009

Double-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (DBACLR) has been developed to produce better clinical outcomes in traditional single-bundle reconstruction, which showed considerable rate of dissatisfaction in restoration of stability and function of the anterior cruciate ligament deficient knee. There is plenty of evidence that DBACLR has theoretical advantages in anatomical, biomechanical, biological, kinematical, and possibly clinical standpoint compared with traditional one but still a lack of available clinical outcome studies with sufficient follow-up to demonstrate the substantial advantages of DBACLR. The purpose of this article is to review the clinical outcomes of double-bundle technique and to address controversy exists over the usefulness of this technique.

• Journal of the Korean Orthopaedic Association
• /
• v.56 no.1
• /
• pp.1-13
• /
• 2021

Considerable progress on anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction surgery has been made over the past 20 years, and the results have improved significantly. An anatomical understanding of the anterior cruciate ligament has also changed, and the surgical technique has also changed accordingly. The double-bundle concept is still valid, but the ribbon-shaped anterior cruciate ligament concept, including direct fiber and indirect fiber, is gradually replacing it. The isometry point theory no longer exists, and various surgical methods, such as single-bundle anatomical reconstruction, double-bundle reconstruction, remnant preservation, and rectangular tunnel technique, are being performed. Regarding the graft, interest in the bone-patellar tendon-bone, patellar tendon, quadriceps tendon, and allogeneic tendon change over time, and this change is ongoing.

• Journal of the Korean Arthroscopy Society
• /
• v.16 no.1
• /
• pp.26-33
• /
• 2012

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the clinical outcomes and stability of anatomical single bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (SBACLR) with quadriceps tendon comparable to double bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (DBACLR). Materials and Methods: We retrospectively reviewed 28 consecutive patients (16 male, 12 female) who underwent SBACLR using quadriceps tendon from March 2009 (Group 1) and compared its clinical results to whom DBACLR with semitendinosus tendon for 53 patients (51 male, 2 female) from August. 2006 (Group 2). Mean age were 34.9 (range, 16-52) in Group 1 and 21.6 (range, 17-55) in Group 2. Mean follow up periods were 13.9 months (range, 12-20) in Group 1 and 36.2 months (range, 20-52) in Group 2. Lysholm score, International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) evaluation form and Tegner score were performed for evaluating the clinical outcome. Lachman test, pivot shift test and KT-1000 arthrometer (MEDmetric Corp., San Diego, CA, USA) were performed for stability. Results: There was no statistical significant difference between the two groups in terms of Lysholm score (Group 1: $85.9{\pm}2.6$, Group 2: $90.9{\pm}1.0$, P=0.226), IKDC score (P=0.345) and Tegner score (Group 1: $6.9{\pm}1.4$, Group 2: $7.1{\pm}1.3$, P=0.523). Nor was there statistical significance between the two groups in terms of KT-1000 arthrometer (Group 1: $1.5{\pm}1.1\;mm$, Group 2: $1.5{\pm}1.6\;mm$, P=0.457), Lachman test (P=0.547) and pivot shift test (P=0.073). Conclusion: Anatomical SBACLR with quadriceps tendon shows similar clinical outcomes and stability comparable to anatomical DBACLR with hamstring tendon.

• Journal of the Korean Orthopaedic Association
• /
• v.55 no.4
• /
• pp.311-317
• /
• 2020

The most recent concept in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction is an anatomical single bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. For an anatomical anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction, the tibial tunnel is made anterior than before, and the femoral tunnel is made in a lower and oblique direction compared to the classical method using the transtibial technique. The anteromedial portal technique, outside-in technique, and modified transtibial technique have been performed to produce femoral tunnels with anatomical positions. Each method has different advantages and disadvantages and is chosen based on the operator's preferences, experience, instruments, and implants.