ABSTRACT
PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to compare the clinical results of arthroscopic single-bundle and double-bundle anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction. METHODS: We designed a prospective study that included patients with an isolated ACL injury. From April 2004 to February 2007, of 147 patients who underwent ACL reconstruction, 113 were included in this study. We serially obtained clinical and radiologic data preoperatively and postoperatively. We compared preoperative data and data at 2 years postoperatively in patients who had undergone single-bundle ACL reconstruction versus patients who had undergone double-bundle ACL reconstruction. There were 50 single-bundle reconstructions and 63 double-bundle reconstructions. Anteroposterior stability was assessed objectively by anterior stress radiographs with the telos device (telos, Marburg, Germany) and the maximal manual test with the KT-2000 arthrometer (MEDmetric, San Diego, CA). Rotational stability was determined by lateral pivot-shift test. The clinical results were assessed by International Knee Documentation Committee and Orthopadische Arbeitsgruppe Knie scores and Tegner activity scale. In addition, we evaluated postoperative thigh circumference and range of motion. RESULTS: Residual anteroposterior laxity determined at 2 years postoperatively by telos and KT-2000 was 1.74mm +/- 1.67mm and 1.79mm +/- 1.56mm, respectively, in the single-bundle reconstruction group and 1.63mm +/- 1.50mm and 1.61mm +/- 1.22mm, respectively, in the double-bundle reconstruction group. There were no statistically significant differences. For the lateral pivot-shift test done at 2 years postoperatively, there was no statistically significant difference. In addition, clinical results such as International Knee Documentation Committee score, Orthopadische Arbeitsgruppe Knie score, Tegner activity scale, thigh circumference, and range of motion showed no significant differences between the 2 groups. CONCLUSIONS: Double-bundle reconstruction of the ACL by a method using 2 femoral tunnel and 2 tibial tunnels showed no differences in stability results or any other clinical aspects or in terms of patient satisfaction. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level II, prospective comparative study.
