Tactile techniques are associated with a high variability of tunnel positions in lateral extra-articular tenodesis procedures.

INTRODUCTION: The purpose of this study was to determine the variability of femoral tunnel positions applying two different lateral extra-articular tenodesis (LET) techniques, guiding on the tactile identification (1) of the lateral epicondyle (Lemaire procedure) and (2) of the Kaplan fibre attachments on the distal femur (MacIntosh procedure) and to analyse whether one of these procedures is more suitable for reliable femoral tunnel positioning in LET procedures. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Two experienced knee surgeons determined femoral tunnel positions in ten fresh-frozen cadaveric knee specimens according to the modified Lemaire and MacIntosh techniques. Tunnel positions were measured on true lateral radiographs as absolute distances from the posterior cortex line (anterior-posterior direction) and from a perpendicular line intersecting the contact of the posterior femoral condyle (proximal-distal direction), respectively. Further, tunnel positions were measured relatively to the femur height. An independent F test was used to compare variances between Lemaire and MacIntosh tunnel positions and between anterior-posterior and proximal-distal directions. RESULTS: The mean Lemaire and MacIntosh positions were found 2.7 ± 5.5 mm and 3.6 ± 3.4 mm anterior to the posterior cortex line, and 7.5 ± 5.0 mm and 17.3 ± 6.9 mm proximal to the perpendicular line intersecting the contact of the posterior femoral condyle, respectively. Mean Lemaire and MacIntosh positions, relative to the femur height, were found at 8.8% and 10.9% (anterior-posterior) and 22.2% and 50.8% (proximal-distal), respectively. Variability in tunnel positioning was observed for both techniques, showing no significant differences in the variance (p > 0.05) and partially overlapping tunnel positions of both techniques. The overall variance of tunnel positions, however, was significantly greater in proximal-distal than in anterior-posterior direction (F = 2.673, p < 0.038). CONCLUSIONS: Femoral tunnel positions in LET procedures have a high degree of variability and inaccuracy. Palpating anatomic landmarks appears to be insufficient to generate reproducible tunnel positions. Radiographic landmarks may enable more reproducible identification of isometric femoral tunnel positions and reduce malpositioning.

High Risk of Tunnel Convergence in Combined Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction and Lateral Extra-articular Tenodesis.

BACKGROUND: Lateral extra-articular tenodesis (LET) is being increasingly added to primary and revision anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction to address residual anterolateral rotatory instability. However, currently there is a lack of knowledge on how close the femoral tunnels are when combining these procedures. PURPOSE/HYPOTHESES: To assess the risk of tunnel convergence in combined ACL and LET procedures using 2 different surgical techniques (Lemaire and MacIntosh). It was hypothesized that the risk of tunnel convergence would be greater when using the more distally located Lemaire position. The authors further hypothesized that tunnel proximity would be influenced by knee size. STUDY DESIGN: Controlled laboratory study. METHODS: Ten fresh-frozen cadaveric knees were used for this study. In each specimen, an anatomic ACL femoral tunnel and 2 LET tunnels were drilled using the Lemaire and MacIntosh positions, respectively. After knee dissection, minimal distances between each ACL and LET tunnel were directly measured on the lateral femoral cortex. Furthermore, computed tomography scans were obtained to measure intertunnel convergence and lateral femoral condyle (LFC) width. On the basis of the average LFC width, knees were divided into large and small knees to determine a relationship between knee size and tunnel convergence. RESULTS: Convergence of ACL and LET tunnels occurred in 7 of 10 cases (70%) using the Lemaire attachment position. All tunnel collisions occurred directly on the lateral femoral cortex, while intertunnel (intramedullary) conflicts were not observed. Collisions emerged in both small (n = 4) and large (n = 3) knees. Critical tunnel convergence did not occur using the MacIntosh position. The mean minimal distance between the LET and ACL tunnel using the Lemaire and MacIntosh positions was 3.1 ± 4.6 mm and 9.8 ± 5.4 mm, respectively. CONCLUSION: Tunnel convergence was more frequently observed in combined ACL and LET reconstruction using the Lemaire technique, independent of the knee size. LET femoral tunnel positioning according to the MacIntosh reconstruction was not associated with tunnel collision. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: These findings help to raise the awareness for the risk of tunnel convergence in combined ACL and LET procedures. Surgeons may contemplate adjustments on the ACL femoral tunnel drilling technique or fixation device when applying an additional Lemaire procedure. However, in the absence of clinical outcome studies comparing different LET techniques, it remains unclear which technique is superior in a clinical setting.