Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research, ISSN - 0973 - 709X

Users Online : 104306

AbstractMaterial and MethodsResultsDiscussionConclusionAcknowledgementReferencesDOI and Others
Article in PDF How to Cite Citation Manager Readers' Comments (0) Audio Visual Article Statistics Link to PUBMED Print this Article Send to a Friend
Advertisers Access Statistics Resources

Dr Mohan Z Mani

"Thank you very much for having published my article in record time.I would like to compliment you and your entire staff for your promptness, courtesy, and willingness to be customer friendly, which is quite unusual.I was given your reference by a colleague in pathology,and was able to directly phone your editorial office for clarifications.I would particularly like to thank the publication managers and the Assistant Editor who were following up my article. I would also like to thank you for adjusting the money I paid initially into payment for my modified article,and refunding the balance.
I wish all success to your journal and look forward to sending you any suitable similar article in future"



Dr Mohan Z Mani,
Professor & Head,
Department of Dermatolgy,
Believers Church Medical College,
Thiruvalla, Kerala
On Sep 2018




Prof. Somashekhar Nimbalkar

"Over the last few years, we have published our research regularly in Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research. Having published in more than 20 high impact journals over the last five years including several high impact ones and reviewing articles for even more journals across my fields of interest, we value our published work in JCDR for their high standards in publishing scientific articles. The ease of submission, the rapid reviews in under a month, the high quality of their reviewers and keen attention to the final process of proofs and publication, ensure that there are no mistakes in the final article. We have been asked clarifications on several occasions and have been happy to provide them and it exemplifies the commitment to quality of the team at JCDR."



Prof. Somashekhar Nimbalkar
Head, Department of Pediatrics, Pramukhswami Medical College, Karamsad
Chairman, Research Group, Charutar Arogya Mandal, Karamsad
National Joint Coordinator - Advanced IAP NNF NRP Program
Ex-Member, Governing Body, National Neonatology Forum, New Delhi
Ex-President - National Neonatology Forum Gujarat State Chapter
Department of Pediatrics, Pramukhswami Medical College, Karamsad, Anand, Gujarat.
On Sep 2018




Dr. Kalyani R

"Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research is at present a well-known Indian originated scientific journal which started with a humble beginning. I have been associated with this journal since many years. I appreciate the Editor, Dr. Hemant Jain, for his constant effort in bringing up this journal to the present status right from the scratch. The journal is multidisciplinary. It encourages in publishing the scientific articles from postgraduates and also the beginners who start their career. At the same time the journal also caters for the high quality articles from specialty and super-specialty researchers. Hence it provides a platform for the scientist and researchers to publish. The other aspect of it is, the readers get the information regarding the most recent developments in science which can be used for teaching, research, treating patients and to some extent take preventive measures against certain diseases. The journal is contributing immensely to the society at national and international level."



Dr Kalyani R
Professor and Head
Department of Pathology
Sri Devaraj Urs Medical College
Sri Devaraj Urs Academy of Higher Education and Research , Kolar, Karnataka
On Sep 2018




Dr. Saumya Navit

"As a peer-reviewed journal, the Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research provides an opportunity to researchers, scientists and budding professionals to explore the developments in the field of medicine and dentistry and their varied specialities, thus extending our view on biological diversities of living species in relation to medicine.
‘Knowledge is treasure of a wise man.’ The free access of this journal provides an immense scope of learning for the both the old and the young in field of medicine and dentistry as well. The multidisciplinary nature of the journal makes it a better platform to absorb all that is being researched and developed. The publication process is systematic and professional. Online submission, publication and peer reviewing makes it a user-friendly journal.
As an experienced dentist and an academician, I proudly recommend this journal to the dental fraternity as a good quality open access platform for rapid communication of their cutting-edge research progress and discovery.
I wish JCDR a great success and I hope that journal will soar higher with the passing time."



Dr Saumya Navit
Professor and Head
Department of Pediatric Dentistry
Saraswati Dental College
Lucknow
On Sep 2018




Dr. Arunava Biswas

"My sincere attachment with JCDR as an author as well as reviewer is a learning experience . Their systematic approach in publication of article in various categories is really praiseworthy.
Their prompt and timely response to review's query and the manner in which they have set the reviewing process helps in extracting the best possible scientific writings for publication.
It's a honour and pride to be a part of the JCDR team. My very best wishes to JCDR and hope it will sparkle up above the sky as a high indexed journal in near future."



Dr. Arunava Biswas
MD, DM (Clinical Pharmacology)
Assistant Professor
Department of Pharmacology
Calcutta National Medical College & Hospital , Kolkata




Dr. C.S. Ramesh Babu
" Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research (JCDR) is a multi-specialty medical and dental journal publishing high quality research articles in almost all branches of medicine. The quality of printing of figures and tables is excellent and comparable to any International journal. An added advantage is nominal publication charges and monthly issue of the journal and more chances of an article being accepted for publication. Moreover being a multi-specialty journal an article concerning a particular specialty has a wider reach of readers of other related specialties also. As an author and reviewer for several years I find this Journal most suitable and highly recommend this Journal."
Best regards,
C.S. Ramesh Babu,
Associate Professor of Anatomy,
Muzaffarnagar Medical College,
Muzaffarnagar.
On Aug 2018




Dr. Arundhathi. S
"Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research (JCDR) is a reputed peer reviewed journal and is constantly involved in publishing high quality research articles related to medicine. Its been a great pleasure to be associated with this esteemed journal as a reviewer and as an author for a couple of years. The editorial board consists of many dedicated and reputed experts as its members and they are doing an appreciable work in guiding budding researchers. JCDR is doing a commendable job in scientific research by promoting excellent quality research & review articles and case reports & series. The reviewers provide appropriate suggestions that improve the quality of articles. I strongly recommend my fraternity to encourage JCDR by contributing their valuable research work in this widely accepted, user friendly journal. I hope my collaboration with JCDR will continue for a long time".



Dr. Arundhathi. S
MBBS, MD (Pathology),
Sanjay Gandhi institute of trauma and orthopedics,
Bengaluru.
On Aug 2018




Dr. Mamta Gupta,
"It gives me great pleasure to be associated with JCDR, since last 2-3 years. Since then I have authored, co-authored and reviewed about 25 articles in JCDR. I thank JCDR for giving me an opportunity to improve my own skills as an author and a reviewer.
It 's a multispecialty journal, publishing high quality articles. It gives a platform to the authors to publish their research work which can be available for everyone across the globe to read. The best thing about JCDR is that the full articles of all medical specialties are available as pdf/html for reading free of cost or without institutional subscription, which is not there for other journals. For those who have problem in writing manuscript or do statistical work, JCDR comes for their rescue.
The journal has a monthly publication and the articles are published quite fast. In time compared to other journals. The on-line first publication is also a great advantage and facility to review one's own articles before going to print. The response to any query and permission if required, is quite fast; this is quite commendable. I have a very good experience about seeking quick permission for quoting a photograph (Fig.) from a JCDR article for my chapter authored in an E book. I never thought it would be so easy. No hassles.
Reviewing articles is no less a pain staking process and requires in depth perception, knowledge about the topic for review. It requires time and concentration, yet I enjoy doing it. The JCDR website especially for the reviewers is quite user friendly. My suggestions for improving the journal is, more strict review process, so that only high quality articles are published. I find a a good number of articles in Obst. Gynae, hence, a new journal for this specialty titled JCDR-OG can be started. May be a bimonthly or quarterly publication to begin with. Only selected articles should find a place in it.
An yearly reward for the best article authored can also incentivize the authors. Though the process of finding the best article will be not be very easy. I do not know how reviewing process can be improved. If an article is being reviewed by two reviewers, then opinion of one can be communicated to the other or the final opinion of the editor can be communicated to the reviewer if requested for. This will help one’s reviewing skills.
My best wishes to Dr. Hemant Jain and all the editorial staff of JCDR for their untiring efforts to bring out this journal. I strongly recommend medical fraternity to publish their valuable research work in this esteemed journal, JCDR".



Dr. Mamta Gupta
Consultant
(Ex HOD Obs &Gynae, Hindu Rao Hospital and associated NDMC Medical College, Delhi)
Aug 2018




Dr. Rajendra Kumar Ghritlaharey

"I wish to thank Dr. Hemant Jain, Editor-in-Chief Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research (JCDR), for asking me to write up few words.
Writing is the representation of language in a textual medium i e; into the words and sentences on paper. Quality medical manuscript writing in particular, demands not only a high-quality research, but also requires accurate and concise communication of findings and conclusions, with adherence to particular journal guidelines. In medical field whether working in teaching, private, or in corporate institution, everyone wants to excel in his / her own field and get recognised by making manuscripts publication.


Authors are the souls of any journal, and deserve much respect. To publish a journal manuscripts are needed from authors. Authors have a great responsibility for producing facts of their work in terms of number and results truthfully and an individual honesty is expected from authors in this regards. Both ways its true "No authors-No manuscripts-No journals" and "No journals–No manuscripts–No authors". Reviewing a manuscript is also a very responsible and important task of any peer-reviewed journal and to be taken seriously. It needs knowledge on the subject, sincerity, honesty and determination. Although the process of reviewing a manuscript is a time consuming task butit is expected to give one's best remarks within the time frame of the journal.
Salient features of the JCDR: It is a biomedical, multidisciplinary (including all medical and dental specialities), e-journal, with wide scope and extensive author support. At the same time, a free text of manuscript is available in HTML and PDF format. There is fast growing authorship and readership with JCDR as this can be judged by the number of articles published in it i e; in Feb 2007 of its first issue, it contained 5 articles only, and now in its recent volume published in April 2011, it contained 67 manuscripts. This e-journal is fulfilling the commitments and objectives sincerely, (as stated by Editor-in-chief in his preface to first edition) i e; to encourage physicians through the internet, especially from the developing countries who witness a spectrum of disease and acquire a wealth of knowledge to publish their experiences to benefit the medical community in patients care. I also feel that many of us have work of substance, newer ideas, adequate clinical materials but poor in medical writing and hesitation to submit the work and need help. JCDR provides authors help in this regards.
Timely publication of journal: Publication of manuscripts and bringing out the issue in time is one of the positive aspects of JCDR and is possible with strong support team in terms of peer reviewers, proof reading, language check, computer operators, etc. This is one of the great reasons for authors to submit their work with JCDR. Another best part of JCDR is "Online first Publications" facilities available for the authors. This facility not only provides the prompt publications of the manuscripts but at the same time also early availability of the manuscripts for the readers.
Indexation and online availability: Indexation transforms the journal in some sense from its local ownership to the worldwide professional community and to the public.JCDR is indexed with Embase & EMbiology, Google Scholar, Index Copernicus, Chemical Abstracts Service, Journal seek Database, Indian Science Abstracts, to name few of them. Manuscriptspublished in JCDR are available on major search engines ie; google, yahoo, msn.
In the era of fast growing newer technologies, and in computer and internet friendly environment the manuscripts preparation, submission, review, revision, etc and all can be done and checked with a click from all corer of the world, at any time. Of course there is always a scope for improvement in every field and none is perfect. To progress, one needs to identify the areas of one's weakness and to strengthen them.
It is well said that "happy beginning is half done" and it fits perfectly with JCDR. It has grown considerably and I feel it has already grown up from its infancy to adolescence, achieving the status of standard online e-journal form Indian continent since its inception in Feb 2007. This had been made possible due to the efforts and the hard work put in it. The way the JCDR is improving with every new volume, with good quality original manuscripts, makes it a quality journal for readers. I must thank and congratulate Dr Hemant Jain, Editor-in-Chief JCDR and his team for their sincere efforts, dedication, and determination for making JCDR a fast growing journal.
Every one of us: authors, reviewers, editors, and publisher are responsible for enhancing the stature of the journal. I wish for a great success for JCDR."



Thanking you
With sincere regards
Dr. Rajendra Kumar Ghritlaharey, M.S., M. Ch., FAIS
Associate Professor,
Department of Paediatric Surgery, Gandhi Medical College & Associated
Kamla Nehru & Hamidia Hospitals Bhopal, Madhya Pradesh 462 001 (India)
E-mail: drrajendrak1@rediffmail.com
On May 11,2011




Dr. Shankar P.R.

"On looking back through my Gmail archives after being requested by the journal to write a short editorial about my experiences of publishing with the Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research (JCDR), I came across an e-mail from Dr. Hemant Jain, Editor, in March 2007, which introduced the new electronic journal. The main features of the journal which were outlined in the e-mail were extensive author support, cash rewards, the peer review process, and other salient features of the journal.
Over a span of over four years, we (I and my colleagues) have published around 25 articles in the journal. In this editorial, I plan to briefly discuss my experiences of publishing with JCDR and the strengths of the journal and to finally address the areas for improvement.
My experiences of publishing with JCDR: Overall, my experiences of publishing withJCDR have been positive. The best point about the journal is that it responds to queries from the author. This may seem to be simple and not too much to ask for, but unfortunately, many journals in the subcontinent and from many developing countries do not respond or they respond with a long delay to the queries from the authors 1. The reasons could be many, including lack of optimal secretarial and other support. Another problem with many journals is the slowness of the review process. Editorial processing and peer review can take anywhere between a year to two years with some journals. Also, some journals do not keep the contributors informed about the progress of the review process. Due to the long review process, the articles can lose their relevance and topicality. A major benefit with JCDR is the timeliness and promptness of its response. In Dr Jain's e-mail which was sent to me in 2007, before the introduction of the Pre-publishing system, he had stated that he had received my submission and that he would get back to me within seven days and he did!
Most of the manuscripts are published within 3 to 4 months of their submission if they are found to be suitable after the review process. JCDR is published bimonthly and the accepted articles were usually published in the next issue. Recently, due to the increased volume of the submissions, the review process has become slower and it ?? Section can take from 4 to 6 months for the articles to be reviewed. The journal has an extensive author support system and it has recently introduced a paid expedited review process. The journal also mentions the average time for processing the manuscript under different submission systems - regular submission and expedited review.
Strengths of the journal: The journal has an online first facility in which the accepted manuscripts may be published on the website before being included in a regular issue of the journal. This cuts down the time between their acceptance and the publication. The journal is indexed in many databases, though not in PubMed. The editorial board should now take steps to index the journal in PubMed. The journal has a system of notifying readers through e-mail when a new issue is released. Also, the articles are available in both the HTML and the PDF formats. I especially like the new and colorful page format of the journal. Also, the access statistics of the articles are available. The prepublication and the manuscript tracking system are also helpful for the authors.
Areas for improvement: In certain cases, I felt that the peer review process of the manuscripts was not up to international standards and that it should be strengthened. Also, the number of manuscripts in an issue is high and it may be difficult for readers to go through all of them. The journal can consider tightening of the peer review process and increasing the quality standards for the acceptance of the manuscripts. I faced occasional problems with the online manuscript submission (Pre-publishing) system, which have to be addressed.
Overall, the publishing process with JCDR has been smooth, quick and relatively hassle free and I can recommend other authors to consider the journal as an outlet for their work."



Dr. P. Ravi Shankar
KIST Medical College, P.O. Box 14142, Kathmandu, Nepal.
E-mail: ravi.dr.shankar@gmail.com
On April 2011
Anuradha

Dear team JCDR, I would like to thank you for the very professional and polite service provided by everyone at JCDR. While i have been in the field of writing and editing for sometime, this has been my first attempt in publishing a scientific paper.Thank you for hand-holding me through the process.


Dr. Anuradha
E-mail: anuradha2nittur@gmail.com
On Jan 2020

Important Notice

Original article / research
Year : 2022 | Month : December | Volume : 16 | Issue : 12 | Page : RC05 - RC08 Full Version

Tibial Guidewire Insertion Timing- Does it Affect the Functional Outcome in Arthroscopic Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction? A Prospective Longitudinal Study


Published: December 1, 2022 | DOI: https://doi.org/10.7860/JCDR/2022/60375.17240
TS Nidhin, R Shibu, AS Shyam Roy

1. Senior Resident, Department of Orthopaedics, Government Medical College, Thiruvananthapuram, Kerala, India. 2. Assistant Professor, Department of Orthopaedics, Government Medical College, Thiruvananthapuram, Kerala, India. 3. Assistant Professor, Department of Orthopaedics, Government Medical College, Thiruvananthapuram, Kerala, India.

Correspondence Address :
Dr. R Shibu,
Assistant Professor, Department of Orthopaedics, Government Medical College, Thiruvananthapuram-695011, Kerala, India.
E-mail: drshibur@gmail.com

Abstract

Introduction: Tibial fixation site of graft in arthroscopic Anterior Cruciate Ligament (ACL) reconstruction has an effect on anterior displacement and internal rotation of the tibia. The position of the interference screw determines the final orientation of the graft. The screw position in turn depends on the position of the tibial guidewire. The tibial guidewire can be placed, before introducing the graft or after the graft placement. There are no studies in the literature comparing the outcome of tibial guidewire placement timing in arthroscopic ACL reconstruction.

Aim: To compare the functional outcome of arthroscopic ACL reconstruction, with placing the tibial guidewire before and after graft passage.

Materials and Methods: This prospective longitudinal study was conducted at Government Medical College, Thiruvananthapuram, India, from February 2020 to January 2021, among patients undergoing arthroscopic ACL reconstruction. A total of 84 patients with an isolated ACL tear, who underwent arthroscopic ACL reconstruction were followed-up for a minimum period of nine months. Two groups were studied, each with 42 patients. In group 1, the tibial guidewire was placed posterolaterally in the tibial tunnel and then, the graft was pulled through femoral and tibial tunnels. In group 2, the guidewire was placed after the graft was passed through femoral and tibial tunnels. Functional outcomes were evaluated with International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) and Lysholm knee scores after nine months. Statistical analyses were carried out using Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS) statistics version 22.0.

Results: The median age of the study subjects were 27 (22;35) years. Fifty nine (70.2%) patients were males. Forty eight (57.1%) patients had left-sided injuries. The majority of injuries (n=58, 69%) were due to sports injuries. In 14 patients (16.7%), the mode of injury was due to road traffic accidents and in 12 patients (14.3%) it was due to a fall. In the majority of the cases (n=50, 59.5%), the duration between injury and ACL reconstruction was three months. The mean IKDC subjective score of group 1 was 86±5.51 and that of group 2 was 81.9±6.64; (p-value=0.003). The mean Lysholm score of group 1 was 84.9±8.73 and that of group 2 was 79.6±9.56; (p-value=0.009).

Conclusion: Arthroscopic ACL reconstruction placing the tibial guidewire posterolaterally prior to graft passage has got a better functional outcome compared to placing the guidewire, after passing the graft. Prior placement of guidewire, before graft ensures the posterolateral position of the interference screw at the tibial tunnel and increases the graft obliquity.

Keywords

Graft obliquity, Interference screw, Lysholm knee score, Posterolateral guidewire, Tibial tunnel

The Anterior Cruciate Ligament (ACL) is one of the primary stabilisers of the knee against anterior translation, rotation and valgus stress. The risk of ACL injury is high among sports persons and active young women (1). The ACL deficiency leads to knee instability, recurrent injuries and intra-articular damage leading to osteoarthritis. Treatment of choice is arthroscopic ACL Reconstruction (ACLR) using autografts (hamstrings, quadriceps, peroneus longus, bone-patella tendon-bone graft), allografts or synthetic grafts. No significant differences were found among these grafts, in terms of clinical objective and subjective results (2). Hamstring autografts gained popularity, due to low harvest morbidity and excellent biomechanical graft properties (3). They result in better knee stability and better synovial coverage compared to allografts (4). Regeneration of the harvested tendon were found in 85% of the cases, with imaging and histologic methodologies (5). Graft fixation at femoral and tibial tunnels are by using suspensory fixation devices, interference screws or staples. Adjustable and fixed length cortical suspensory fixation device has similar graft healing effect in the femoral bone tunnel (6). Interference screw tibial fixation has superior biomechanical properties for cyclic testing compared to the suspensory fixation (7). Anatomic ACLR had better outcomes compared with non anatomic ACLR (8). Single-bundle reconstruction and anatomic tunnel position with suspension femoral fixation and screw fixation for the tibia is preferred (9).

The ACL graft position and orientation in the joint depends on the position of the tibial and femoral tunnels. ACL fibres form a flat ribbon 2 mm from its femoral insertion (10). Tibial ACL insertion is C-shaped and its centre is the bony attachment of anterior root of lateral meniscus. Anteromedial bone tunnel with a flat graft and a “C-shaped” tibial footprint is desired in anatomical ACL reconstruction (11). Center of the ACL tibial footprint is 15 mm anterior to Posterior Cruciate Ligament (PCL) and near to medial spine (12). Tibial fixation site have an effect on anterior displacement and medial rotation of tibia (13). During Lachman test, anterior tibial translation is greater with vertical grafts. Tibial tunnel determines ACL graft obliquity and knee stability (14). Position of the interference screw determines the orientation of the graft. When the screw is positioned in the posterolateral corner, the graft moves anteromedially, producing a more oblique graft mimicking natural ACL.

The guidewire for tibial interference screw is usually placed after graft passage. Alternatively, guidewire can be positioned in the posterolateral corner of tibial tunnel prior to graft passage (15). However, there are no studies in the literature comparing these two procedures. The purpose of the present study was to compare the functional outcome of arthroscopic ACL reconstruction with placing the tibial guidewire in the posterolateral aspect of tibial tunnel prior to graft passage, with the conventional technique of passing the guidewire after the graft is pulled through the femoral and tibial tunnels, for fixing interference screw.

Material and Methods

A prospective longitudinal study was conducted at Government Medical College, Thiruvananthapuram, India, after IEC clearance (HEC.No.01/23/2020/MCT), from February 2020 to January 2021, among patients undergoing arthroscopic ACL reconstruction. The last patient was recruited in April 2020. All consecutive skeletally mature patients with ACL injury, who met the inclusion criteria and presented within the stipulated period of study were included. Written informed consent were obtained from all the participants.

Inclusion and Exclusion criteria: Patients above 18 years with isolated complete ACL tear confirmed by Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) were included in the study. Patients with associated bony injury around knee, meniscal injuries, posterior cruciate ligament injury and with bilateral knee injuries were excluded from the study.

All the surgeries were done by the same surgical team. Arthroscopic single bundle anatomical ACL reconstruction were done with hamstring tendon autografts in all cases. Total 84 patients were enrolled for the study. All patients were allotted to two groups using alternate odd and even numbers:

Group 1 (n=42): Patients underwent arthroscopic ACL reconstruction with placing a guidewire in the posterolateral aspect of tibial tunnel prior to graft passage.
Group 2 (n=42): In all patients, the guidewire was placed in tibial tunnel only after graft passage.

The clinical data collected and examined, as per the guidelines given in the International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) subjective knee evaluation form (16) and Lysholm knee scoring scale (17).

International knee documentation committee score: The IKDC subjective form consists of 18 questions related to symptoms, sports activity and knee function. Individual items are summed and transformed to a scale 0 to 100 (16).

• Normal score is 91-100,
• Near normal 81-90,
• Abnormal 71- 80 and
• Severely abnormal 70 or less

Lysholm knee scoring scale: The Lysholm knee scoring scale is a patient reported instrument that consists of subscales for pain, instability, locking, swelling, limp, stair climbing, squatting and the need for support (17).

• Score 91-100 -excellent;
• Score 84-90 -good;
• Score 65-83 -fair and
• Score 64 or less -unsatisfactory

Surgical Technique

All surgeries were done under spinal anaesthesia. Standard anterolateral and anteromedial portals were used. After diagnostic arthroscopy, femoral tunnel was made using transportal technique at the centre of femoral footprint. A loop of Ethibond (Ethicon, India) was passed through it. Tibial tunnel was created using a tibial ACL jig at an angle of 55°. Ethibond was pulled through the tibial tunnel. After this, in group 1, patients the guidewire for the interference screw was passed in the tibial tunnel and held it in the posterolateral part of tibial tunnel using artery forceps (Table/Fig 1). Graft was then pulled through tibial and femoral tunnels with guidewire in-situ (Table/Fig 2),(Table/Fig 3).

Fixation of graft at femoral attachment was with adjustable loop suspensory fixation. After flipping of the button at the femoral end, the guide wire was pulled distally, so that only a minimum portion of it remains inside the joint. This prevents the possibility of breakage of guidewire during cycling. The knee was cycled 20 times to remove the graft creep. After cycling, the position of the guidewire was again confirmed. With the knee in 20° flexion and applying a posterior drawer, interference screw was passed over tibial guidewire, maintaining constant tension on the graft.

In group 2 patients, the graft was pulled through tibial and femoral tunnels (Table/Fig 4) and fixed at femoral end with adjustable loop suspensory fixation. The knee was cycled 20 times. The tibial guidewire was passed between the graft and posterior part of tibial tunnel (Table/Fig 5). With the knee in 20° flexion and applying a posterior drawer, interference screw passed over tibial guide wire, maintaining constant tension on the graft. Parenteral antibiotics was given for three days. Partial weight bearing with brace, quadriceps strengthening exercises and knee flexion started in the first week. Physiotherapy continued to attain full knee flexion and weight bearing, without brace by six weeks after surgery. Regular follow-up of all patients were done at Outpatient Department. An independent observer assessed the functional outcome by IKDC score and Lysholm score at nine months. The results were compared among the two groups.

Statistical Analysis

Statistical analyses was carried out using Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS) statistics version 22.0 (IBM Corp; Chicago, United States of America). Continuous variables were presented as mean±standard deviation or median±interquartile range. The Chi-square test was used to analyse categorical variables. Independent t-test was used for normally distributed continuous variables. The Mann-Whitney U test was used for comparing non normally distributed data. A p-value <0.05 was considered statistically significant.

Results

In the present study, the median age of the study subjects were 27 (22;35) years (Table/Fig 6). Fifty nine (70.2%) patients were males. Forty eight (57.1%) patients had left-sided injury and rest had right-sided. Majority of injuries, n=58 (69%) were due to sports injuries (Table/Fig 7). In majority of the cases n=50 (59.5%), the duration between injury and ACL reconstruction was three months (Table/Fig 8). The baseline features were comparable (Table/Fig 9). The IKDC subjective score at nine months ranged from 68.9 to 98.8. Functional outcome of total patients according to IKDC score was found to be normal for 14 (16.7%) and near normal for 50 (59.5%) patients (Table/Fig 10).

The mean IKDC subjective score of group 1 was 86±5.51 and that of group 2 was 81.9±6.64 (p-value=0.003). Lysholm score at nine months ranged from 60-98. Of the total patients, 41 (48.8%) had good functional outcome and 30 (35.7%) had fair outcome. The mean Lysholm score of group 1 was 84.9±8.73 and that of group 2 was 79.6±9.56; the difference was statistically significant (p-value=0.009) (Table/Fig 11),(Table/Fig 12). There were no cases of haemarthrosis or infection requiring aspiration or joint lavage. There were no cases of arthrofibrosis or graft rupture.

Discussion

Majority of ACL injuries in this study were due to sports injuries (n=58, 69%) and it can be substantiated by the fact that majority of the patients were males n=59, (70.2%) and the average age of patients was 27 years. Taketomi S et al., in a retrospective study involving 226 patients, recommended that ACL reconstruction should be done within six months of injury to prevent chondral or meniscal damages (18). Rushdi I et al., in their study reported that arthrofibrosis was a potential complication of acute ACL reconstruction, especially if, done within three weeks of injury (19). The duration between injury and procedure in majority of cases (59.5%) in this study was three months.

The present study showed that IKDC subjective score and Lysholm score at nine months were high when the guidewire was passed posterolaterally prior to graft placement in the tibial tunnel. The position of guidewire determines the position of interference screw. Bedi A, et al., in a cadaveric study to evaluate the effect of tibial tunnel position on knee kinematics, postulated that better control of the Lachman and the pivot shift is seen when ACL graft is placed in the anterior aspect of tibial footprint (20). Udagawa K et al., in their study on factors influencing graft impingement, reported that since the tibial tunnels were created with knee in 90° flexion and it moves laterally as knee extends, due to the screw-home movement, the tibial tunnel should be medial within the ACL tibial footprint to decrease the risk of wall impingement (21).

Chernchujit B et al., in their study of 61 patients comparing anterior and posterior screw placements in the tibial tunnel concluded that, the sagittal plane graft obliquity was increased in patients with posterolateral position of the interference screw in the tibial tunnel. This also pushes the graft anteriorly and near to the anterior tibial margin. This orientation mimics the normal ACL (22).

Tibial guidewire placement after graft passage through femoral and tibial tunnels may be difficult, due to snuggly fitting graft in tibial tunnel (15). Sometimes, it may get misplaced, anterior or medial to graft. It may pass through the fibres of graft causing subsequent intrasubstance damage of the graft during screw insertion (15). Graft displacement in the tibial tunnel while fixing interference screw affects the orientation of the graft. When the screw is in the posterolateral corner, the graft moves anteromedially producing a more oblique graft, mimicking native ACL (14),(22). When the screw is placed anteromedially, the graft moves posterolaterally in the tibial tunnel, making it more vertical leading to greater anterior tibial translation. If the screw is placed medially, it pushes the graft laterally, causing impingement with lateral femoral condyle (15). Posterolateral position of the interference screw in the tibial tunnel has got a better functional outcome (15),(22).

Limitation(s)

Small sample size and relatively short follow-up period. A followup period of nine months was a short period to comment on late complications like early osteoarthritis.

Conclusion

Arthroscopic ACL reconstruction placing the tibial guidewire posterolaterally prior to graft passage has got a better functional outcome, compared to placing the guidewire after passing the graft through femoral and tibial tunnels. Prior placement of guidewire before graft ensures posterolateral position of interference screw at tibial tunnel and increases the graft obliquity.

Acknowledgement

Authors would like to thank Dr. I Yadev for his contributions in statistical analysis.

References

1.
Mall NA, Chalmers PN, Moric M, Tanaka MJ, Cole BJ, Bach BR, et al. Incidence and trends of anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction in the United States. Am J Sports Med 2014;42:2363-70.10.1177/0363546514542796. [crossref] [PubMed]
2.
Su M, Jia X, Zhang Z, Jin Z, Li Y, Dong Q, et al. Medium-term (Least 5 years) comparative outcomes in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction using 4SHG, allograft, and LARS ligament. Clin J Sport Med. 2021;31(2):e101-10. 10.1097/ jsm.0000000000000730.
3.
Lawhorn KW, Howell SM. Principles for using hamstring tendons for anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Clin Sports Med. 2007;26(4):567-85. 10.1016/j. csm.2007.07.002. [crossref] [PubMed]
4.
Zheng X, Hu Y, Xie P, Li T, Feng Ye, Gu J, et al. Clinical outcomes and second-look arthroscopic findings of anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction with autograft, hybrid graft, and allograft. J Orthop Surg. 2019;14:380. 10.1186/s13018-019- 1439-8. [crossref] [PubMed]
5.
Papalia R, Franceschi F, D’Adamio S, Diaz Balzani L, Maffulli N, Denaro V, et al. Hamstring tendon regeneration after harvest for anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: A systematic review. Arthrosc J Arthrosc Relat Surg. 2015;31(6):1169-83. 10.1016/j.arthro.2014.11.015. [crossref] [PubMed]
6.
Ahn JH, Ko TS, Lee YS, Jeong HJ, Park JK. Magnetic resonance imaging and clinical results of outside-in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: A comparison of fixed- and adjustable-length loop cortical fixation. Clin Orthop Surg. 2018;10(2):157-66. 10.4055/cios.2018.10.2.157. [crossref] [PubMed]
7.
Fogel H, Golz A, Burleson A, Muriuki M, Havey R, Carandang G, et al. A biomechanical analysis of tibial fixation methods in hamstring-graft anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Iowa Orthop J. 2019;39(1):141-47.
8.
Fernandes TL, Moreira HH, Andrade R, Sasaki SU, Bernardo WM, Pedrinelli A, et al. Clinical outcome evaluation of anatomic anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction with tunnel positioning using gold standard techniques: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Orthop J Sports Med. 2021;9(6):23259671211013330. 10.1177/23259671211013327. [crossref] [PubMed]
9.
Grassi A, Carulli C, Innocenti M, Mosca M, Zaffagnini S, Bait C, et al. New trends in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: A systematic review of national surveys of the last 5 years. Joints. 2018;6(3):177-87. 10.1055/s-0038-1672157. [crossref] [PubMed]
10.
Smigielski R, Zdanowicz U, Drwiega M, Ciszek B, Ciszkowska-Lyson B, Siebold R. Ribbon like appearance of the midsubstance fibres of the anterior cruciate ligament close to its femoral insertion site: A cadaveric study including 111 knees. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2015;23(11):3143-50. 10.1007/s00167-014-3146-7. [crossref] [PubMed]
11.
Siebold R, Schuhmacher P, Fernandez F, S migielski R, Fink C, Brehmer A, et al. Flat midsubstance of the anterior cruciate ligament with tibial “C”-shaped insertion site. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2015;23(11):3136-42. 10.1007/s00167-014-3058-6. [crossref] [PubMed]
12.
Hwang MD, Piefer JW, Lubowitz JH. Anterior cruciate ligament tibial footprint anatomy: Systematic review of the 21st century literature. Arthrosc J Arthrosc Relat Surg. 2012;28(5):728-34. 10.1016/j.arthro.2011.11.025. [crossref] [PubMed]
13.
Ishibashi Y, Rudy TW, Livesay GA, Stone JD, Fu FH, Woo SLY. The effect of anterior cruciate ligament graft fixation site at the tibia on knee stability: Evaluation using a robotic testing system. Arthrosc J Arthrosc Relat Surg. 1997;13(2):177- 82. 10.1016/s0749-8063(97)90152-3. [crossref] [PubMed]
14.
Mall NA, Matava MJ, Wright RW, Brophy RH. Relation between anterior cruciate ligament graft obliquity and knee laxity in elite athletes at the national football league combine. Arthrosc J Arthrosc Relat Surg. 2012;28(8):1104-13. 10.1016/j. arthro.2011.12.018. [crossref] [PubMed]
15.
Parate P, Chernchujit B. A surgical technique for posterolateral placement of interference screw accurately in tibial tunnel in single-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Arthrosc Tech. 2016;5(6):e1481-6. 10.1016/j.eats. 2016.08.026. [crossref] [PubMed]
16.
Anderson AF, Irrgang JJ, Kocher MS, Mann BJ, Harrast JJ. The International knee documentation committee subjective knee evaluation form: Normative data. Am J Sports Med. 2006;34:128-35. 10.1177/0363546505280214. [crossref] [PubMed]
17.
Smith HJ, Richardson JB, Tennant A. Modification and validation of the lysholm knee scale to assess articular cartilage damage. Osteoarthritis Cartilage. 2009;17:53-58.10.1016/j.joca.2008.05.002. [crossref] [PubMed]
18.
Taketomi S, Inui H, Yamagami R, Kawaguchi K, Nakazato K, Kono K, et al. Surgical timing of anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction to prevent associated meniscal and cartilage lesions. J Orthop Sci Off J Jpn Orthop Assoc. 2018;23(3):546-51. 10.1016/j.jos.2018.02.006. [crossref] [PubMed]
19.
Rushdi I, Sharifudin S, Shukur A. Arthrofibrosis following anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Malays Orthop J. 2019;13(3):34-38. 10.5704/MOJ.1911.006. [crossref] [PubMed]
20.
Bedi A, Maak T, Musahl V, Citak M, O’Loughlin PF, Choi D, et al. Effect of tibial tunnel position on stability of the knee after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: Is the tibial tunnel position most important? Am J Sports Med. 2011;39(2):366-73. 10.1177/0363546510388157. [crossref] [PubMed]
21.
Udagawa K, Niki Y, Enomoto H, Toyama Y, Suda Y. Factors influencing graft impingement on the wall of the intercondylar notch after anatomic double-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Am J Sports Med. 2014;42(9):2219- 25. 10.1177/0363546514536872. [crossref] [PubMed]
22.
Chernchujit B, Agrawal S, Sukhapradit B. Does the position of interference screw in tibial tunnel effect anatomic orientation in single bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction? Asia-Pac J Sports Med Arthrosc Rehabil Technol. 2020;22:15-19. 10.1016/j.asmart.2020.06.003. [crossref] [PubMed]

DOI and Others

DOI: 10.7860/JCDR/2022/60375.17240

Date of Submission: Sep 23, 2022
Date of Peer Review: Oct 15, 2022
Date of Acceptance: Nov 26, 2022
Date of Publishing: Dec 01, 2022

AUTHOR DECLARATION:
• Financial or Other Competing Interests: None
• Was Ethics Committee Approval obtained for this study? Yes
• Was informed consent obtained from the subjects involved in the study? Yes
• For any images presented appropriate consent has been obtained from the subjects. Yes

PLAGIARISM CHECKING METHODS:
• Plagiarism X-checker: Nov 04, 2022
• Manual Googling: Nov 16, 2022
• iThenticate Software: Nov 22, 2022 (7%)

ETYMOLOGY: Author Origin

JCDR is now Monthly and more widely Indexed .
  • Emerging Sources Citation Index (Web of Science, thomsonreuters)
  • Index Copernicus ICV 2017: 134.54
  • Academic Search Complete Database
  • Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ)
  • Embase
  • EBSCOhost
  • Google Scholar
  • HINARI Access to Research in Health Programme
  • Indian Science Abstracts (ISA)
  • Journal seek Database
  • Google
  • Popline (reproductive health literature)
  • www.omnimedicalsearch.com