Comparison of Clinical And Radiological Outcomes Of The Anatomic Single Bundle ACL Reconstruction (SB-ACLR) With A Novel Modified All-Inside Double Bundle ACL Reconstruction Technique Using Single Tibial Socket And Two Femoral Sockets (DB- ACLR)

Comparison of Clinical And Radiological Outcomes Of The Anatomic Single Bundle ACL Reconstruction (SB-ACLR) With A Novel Modified All-Inside Double Bundle ACL Reconstruction Technique Using Single Tibial Socket And Two Femoral Sockets (DB- ACLR)

Vinod Kumar, MBBS, MS, DNB, MNAMS, INDIA Teja Prashanth Rongali , MBBS, MS (Ortho), DNB, INDIA

Maulana Azad Medical College, New Delhi, New Delhi, INDIA


2025 Congress   ePoster Presentation   2025 Congress   Not yet rated

 

Anatomic Location

Anatomic Structure

Diagnosis / Condition

Ligaments

ACL

Diagnosis Method

MRI


Summary: Evaluation and comparision of clinical and radiological outcomes of the anatomic single bundle ACL reconstruction (SB-ACLR) with a novel modified all-inside double bundle ACL reconstruction technique using single tibial socket and two femoral sockets (DB- ACLR)


Objective

To evaluate and compare the clinical and radiological outcomes of the anatomic single bundle ACL reconstruction (SB-ACLR) with a novel modified all-inside double bundle ACL reconstruction technique using single tibial socket and two femoral sockets (DB- ACLR).

Materials And Methods

This was a prospective, single-centre, single-surgeon, interventional study. A total of 40 patients were included in this study and were segregated into two groups (20 each). The average follow-up duration was about 12 months in both the comparison groups. Clinical examination, KT-2000 arthrometer measurements (side-to-side-differences), IKDC, Lysholm, and Tegner scores were used to evaluate the function of the knee joint during the pre-operative and post-operative period. Radiological parameters of tunnel dilation and ligamentization were also assessed in both groups.

Results

The postoperative Lysholm, IKDC and Tegner scores improved significantly in both groups with a greater improvement in DB- ACLR group (insignificant, P>0.05). The Lachman test positivity rate, Anterior drawer test positivity rate and pivot shift test positivity rate, and KT-2000 measured anterior knee laxity (2.8±1.05 vs. 5.90±1.91mm in the SB-ACLR group; 1.56±1.22 vs 4.70±1.70mm in the DB- ACLR group) were significantly reduced post-operatively in both groups (P < 0.05). However, no statistically significant difference was observed between the two groups at the final follow-up (P > 0.05). Tunnel dilatation (with more widening in SB-ACLR group P<0.0.5) and good ligamentization was observed in both groups.

Conclusion

This DB- ACLR technique achieved a satisfactory clinical outcome with better rotational stability compared to the traditional SB-ACLR technique. Long term follow-up studies with larger sample sizes maybe needed to draw definite comparisons.