• 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.15 no.2
• /
• pp.125-131
• /
• 2011

Optimal treatment of the torn posterior cruciate ligament (PCL) remains controversial. The type of tibial fixation (transtibial vs inlay), the femoral tunnel position within the femoral footprint (central, eccentric or isometric), and the number of bundles in the reconstruction (single-bundle vs double-bundle) are controversial issues. The PCL has a better chance of spontaneously healing than the anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) because of a rich blood supply (near the branch of the middle genicular artery) and coverage with a thicker synovium. In general, for easier passage of the graft and full visualization of the original ligament attachment site during the precise positioning of the tunnel, the remaining PCL fibers are usually debrided during reconstruction. However, the remaining remnant structures would significantly contribute to the posterior stability of the knee joint, the healing of the graft, preserving proprioceptive function of the mechanoreceptors in the PCL. Double bundle PCL reconstruction may result in some surgical complications because of increased complexity of making tunnel. Therefore, single bundle PCL reconstruction with remnant preservation seems to be an effective procedure.

• 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 Arthroscopy Society
• /
• v.11 no.2
• /
• pp.92-98
• /
• 2007

Purposes: The purpose of this study was to report surgical technique of double bundle anterior cruciate ligament(ACL) reconstruction and to compare the short-term clinical results between arthroscopic single-bundle and double-bundle ACL reconstruction. Materials and Methods: From May 2005 to May 2006, ninety-eight patients were underwent ACL reconstruction. We designed prospective study with sixty-one patients who were revealed isolated ACL injury. We serially checked clinical and radiologic data preoperatively and postoperatively. We compared single-bundle with double-bundle ACL reconstruction patients with preoperative datas and postoperatively 1-year data. There were 30 single bundle reconstruction and 31 double bundle reconstruction. Stability was assessed objectively by anterior stress radiographs with the $Telos^{(R)}$ device and the maximal manual test with the KT-2000 arthrometer. The clinical results were assessed by IKDC(International Knee Documentation Committee) and OAK(Orthopadische Arbeitsgruppe Knie) scores. Also, we evaluated postoperative thigh circumference and range of motion. All of operations were done by only one surgeon. Results: At single-bundle reconstruction group, preoperative AP instability which was checked by $Telos^{(R)}$ device and the maximal manual test with the KT-2000 arthrometer was $7.9{\pm}3.3$ and $7.4{\pm}2.0$, respectively. At double-bundle reconstruction group, it was $8.3{\pm}3.5$ and $7.9{\pm}3.2$, respectively. Residual AP laxity checked at 1 year after operation was $1.9{\pm}1.2$ and $2.2{\pm}1.6$ in single-bundle reconstruction group, and $1.1{\pm}0.9$ and $1.0{\pm}1.0$ in double-bundle reconstruction group. So, double-bundle reconstruction had better results in both anterior stress radiographs with the $Telos^{(R)}$ device and the maximal manual test with the KT-2000 arthrometer, and there were significant differences in statistics. But, clinical results such as IKDC(International Knee Documentation Committee) scores, OAK(Orthopadische Arbeitsgruppe Knie) scores, thigh circumference and range of motion had no significant difference between two groups. Conclusions: On the basis of stability, the side-to-side anterior laxity of double-bundle ACL reconstruction was significantly better than that of single-bundle reconstruction, although there were no significant differences in the other clinical measures among them.

• Journal of the Korean Arthroscopy Society
• /
• v.12 no.3
• /
• pp.198-204
• /
• 2008

Purpose: The purpose of this study is to analyze the merits and demerits of double bundle reconstruction and achieve improvements hereafter, by comparing the results of double bundle and single bundle reconstruction using tibialis anterior allograft. Materials and Methods: Twenty seven patients were divided to undergo either double bundle(n=14) or single bundle(n=13) reconstruction with tibialis anterior allograft tendon. The evaluation methods were AP laxity with KT-2000 arthrometer, isokinetic knee strength measurements, pivot-shift test, IKDC subjective score, Lysholm knee score, Tegner activity score, radiographic evaluations with postoperative MRI, and second look arthroscopy. Results: Lysholm knee score and Tegner activity score were significantly better in double bundle reconstruction. In pivot-shift test, single bundle reconstruction was evaluated as grade 0 in 10 of the knees, grade 1 in 1, and grade 2 in 2. Double bundle reconstruction was evaluated as grade 0 in 13, and grade 2 in 1. In second look arthroscopy, single bundle was evaluated as excellent in 6 of the knees, fair in 7, anteromedial bundle of double bundle reconstruction was excellent in 13 and fair in 1, and posterolateral bundle was excellent in 4, fair in 9, and poor in 1. There were no significant differences in other evaluations. Conclusion: Favorable outcome may be expected with double bundle reconstruction of ACL. However there are still need for improvement in terms of reconstruction technique and rehabilitation protocol to reduce PL bundle injury.

• Journal of the Korean Arthroscopy Society
• /
• v.9 no.2
• /
• pp.222-231
• /
• 2005

Purpose: This article describes a double-bundle ACL reconstruction technique using a five-strand hamstring tendon autograft with conventional anteromedial bundle reconstruction and additional posterolateral bundle reconstruction. Operative technique: For the tibial tunnel, the conventional single tunnel technique is performed and for the femoral tunnel, the double tunnel technique is performed with the anteromedial and posterolateral bundle. After minimal notchplasty, the anteromedial femoral tunnel is prepared with leaving one milimeter of posterior femoral cortex within the over-the-top, which if positioned at the 11-o'clock orientation for the right knee or at the 1-o'clock position for the left knee. The posterolateral femoral tunnel that is located 5 to 7 mm superior to the inner margin of the lateral meniscus anterior horn at $90^{\circ}$ of flexion is prepared with tile outside-in technique using a 4.5 cannulated reamer. The graft material for the double bundle reconstruction is made of the conventional four-strand hamstring autograft in the anteromedial bundle and of a single-strand semitendinosus tendon in the posterolateral bundle. The anteromedial bundle is fixed with using a rigid fix system on the femoral side and the posterolateral bundle is fixed to tie with the miniplate from the outside femur. Then, with the knee in $10^{\circ}\;to\;20^{\circ}$ of flexion, a bioabsorbable screw is simultaneously applied to achieve tibial fixation with tensioning of both bundles. Conclusion: A double bundle reconstruction with five-strand hamstring autograft, which is designed with a favorable conventional anteromedial bundle and an additional posterolateral bundle to restore rotation stability, seems to be a very effective method for the treatment for ACL instabilities.

• Proceedings of the SAREK Conference
• /
• 2007.11a
• /
• pp.191-196
• /
• 2007

This paper presents the measuring technique for local heat transfer coefficients using a copper sensor in a rod bundle with mixing vanes. A copper sensor consists of a cartridge heater and four pieces of thermocouple. The Heater is located at the center of the copper sensor and thermocouples measure the surface temperature of the copper sensor. Unheated copper sensor and heated copper sensor are able to measure the local heat transfer coefficient at the position where the heated copper sensor is installed. However the entire region of a rod bundle is actually not heated, the decay of local heat transfer coefficients measured represents overestimated value rather than an actual value. The calibration curve for local heat transfer coefficients is presented using the correction factor calculated by CFD.

• Journal of the Korean Arthroscopy Society
• /
• v.2 no.1
• /
• pp.25-32
• /
• 1998

The distinction between isolated and combined injuries is crucial both for treatment and prognosis. For most combined injuries, surgical treatment continues to be favored over nonoperative treatment. It is generally agreed that isolatel PCL injuries do well without surgery. There has been an interest by many authors to fix the graft directly to the posterior aspect of the tibia(tibial inlay). With this procedure, tibial graft fixation will be more direct and theoretically reduce the bending effects of the graft with a fixation site far away from the tibial insertion. Modified tibial inlay technique, which is the posterior approach does not require the patient to be in the prone or lateral decubitus position during the operation. Use of a double-bundle reconstructive technique is attractive and has been performed by some surgeons. At this time, this procedure is still being investigated and should not be routinely used in the clinical setting until studies have indicated an advantage over current single-bundle techniques. However theologically, double-bundle reconstructive technique is more useful in severe posterior unstable knee. Recent advances have increased our knowledge of the anatomy and mechanical characteristics of the PCL. Basic science research has further increased our awareness of the interaction of the posterolateral structures with the PCL. To achieve restoration of normal posterior laxity, it is critical to address the posterior as well as the postero-lateral structures. Surgical treatment is often complex and requires a wide range of surgical techniques and skills to treat associated injuries. When the PCL is reconstructed, most surgeons choose to reconstruct the anterolateral component using a graft of sufficient size and strength. The initial postoperative rehabilitation should be addressed cautiously in an effort to avoid excessive forces on delicate repairs and reconstructions in these complex injuries. Further research is necessary to evaluate new surgical approaches such as double-bundle reconstructions and tibial inlay techniques as well as improved techniques for capsular and collateral ligament injuries.

• Archives of Reconstructive Microsurgery
• /
• v.14 no.2
• /
• pp.131-137
• /
• 2005

The extensor digitorum brevis (EDB) muscle island flap is a reliable, safe method for coverage of foot and ankle. There are many variation in approach such as curvilinear, zigzag, L-shaped or vertical longitudinal incision for exposure of the EDB muscle. These approaches use only single incision excluding the distal incision for exposure of the distal tendon. Since dorsalis pedis artery vascular bundle and sinus tarsi branch of the lateral tarsal artery both requires careful dissection, single incision alone may cause not only difficulty in exposure but also skin sloughing at donor site. So we tried to modify the approach into two parallel longitudinal incision, one for dorsalis pedis vascular bundle and the other for sinus tarsi branch exposure. The author treated 9 patient with EDB muscle flap. We used single incision in six patients, and two parallel incision in three patients. All the flap survived. In two parallel incision group, dissection was more easy and rapid. So we would like to suggest that two parallel longitudinal incision approach is better method than the single incision technique for exposure of the EDB muscle flap.