Effect of Tibial Tunnel Placement Using the Lateral Meniscus as a Landmark on Clinical Outcomes of Anatomic Single-Bundle Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction

Kadir Buyukdogan,* MD, Michael S. Laidlaw MD, Michael A. Fox MD, Michelle E. Kew MD, and Mark D. Miller MD Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, VA, USA Background: It remains unclear if use of the lateral meniscus anterior horn (LMAH) as a landmark will produce consistent tunnel positions in the anteroposterior (AP) distance across the tibial plateau. Purpose: To evaluate the AP location of anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction tibial tunnels utilizing the LMAH as an intra-articular landmark and to examine how tunnel placement affects knee stability and clinical outcomes. Study Design: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. Methods: A retrospective review was conducted of 98 patients who underwent primary ACL reconstruction with quadrupled hamstring tendon autografts between March 2013 and June 2017. Patients with unilateral ACL injuries and a minimum follow- up of 2 years were included in the study. All guide pins for the tibial tunnel were placed using the posterior border of the LMAH as an intra-articular landmark. Guide pins were evaluated with the Bernard-Hertel grid in the femur and the Staubli-Rauschning method in the tibia. Patients were divided by the radiographic location of the articular entry point of the guide pin with relation to the anterior 40% of the tibial plateau. Outcomes were evaluated by the Marx Activity Scale and International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) form. Anterior knee laxity was evaluated using a KT-1000 arthrometer and graded with the objective portion of the IKDC form. Rotational stability was evaluated using the pivot-shift test. Results: A total of 60 patients were available for follow-up at a mean 28.6 months. The overall percentage of AP placement of the tibial tunnel was 39.3% 6 3.8% (mean 6 SD; range, 31%-47%). Side-to-side difference of anterior knee laxity was significantly lower in the anterior group than the posterior group (1.2 6 1.1 mm vs 2.5 6 1.3 mm; P \ .001; r = 0.51). The percentage of AP placement of the tibial tunnel demonstrated a positive medium correlation with side-to-side difference of anterior knee laxity as measured by a KT-1000 arthrometer (r = 0.430; P \ .001). The anterior group reported significantly better distribution of IKDC grading as compared with the posterior group (26 grade A and 6 grade B vs 15 grade A and 13 grade B; P = .043; V= 0.297). The pivot-shift test results and outcome scores showed no significant differences between the groups. Conclusion: Using the posterior border of the LMAH as an intraoperative landmark yields a wide range of tibial tunnel locations along the tibial plateau, with anterior placement of the tibial tunnel leading toward improved anterior knee stability. Keywords: anterior cruciate ligament; tibial tunnel; lateral meniscus; fluoroscopy