Anatomy Research International

Anatomy Research International / 2012 / Article
Special Issue

Three-Dimensional Imaging and Modeling of Anatomic Structures, Sectional and Radiological Anatomy, and Staining Techniques

View this Special Issue

Review Article | Open Access

Volume 2012 |Article ID 569704 | 5 pages | https://doi.org/10.1155/2012/569704

Three-Dimensional Anatomic Evaluation of the Anterior Cruciate Ligament for Planning Reconstruction

Academic Editor: Levent Sarıkcıoǧlu
Received29 Apr 2011
Accepted14 Aug 2011
Published05 Oct 2011

Abstract

Anatomic study related to the anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction surgery has been developed in accordance with the progress of imaging technology. Advances in imaging techniques, especially the move from two-dimensional (2D) to three-dimensional (3D) image analysis, substantially contribute to anatomic understanding and its application to advanced ACL reconstruction surgery. This paper introduces previous research about image analysis of the ACL anatomy and its application to ACL reconstruction surgery. Crucial bony landmarks for the accurate placement of the ACL graft can be identified by 3D imaging technique. Additionally, 3D-CT analysis of the ACL insertion site anatomy provides better and more consistent evaluation than conventional “clock-face” reference and roentgenologic quadrant method. Since the human anatomy has a complex three-dimensional structure, further anatomic research using three-dimensional imaging analysis and its clinical application by navigation system or other technologies is warranted for the improvement of the ACL reconstruction.

1. Introduction

Recent progress of the anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction procedure and related research largely stems from the increased attention to the restoration of the original anatomy. An accurate evaluation of the native anatomy is critical for achieving anatomic ACL reconstruction. Clinical outcome could be imperfect when the graft placement is not located at an anatomic position [1, 2]. Also, conventional transtibial ACL reconstruction, which often locates the graft away from anatomic location [3], leads to abnormal biomechanical behavior and in vivo knee kinematics [46], which could influence long-term knee joint health [7, 8]. On the other hand, the anatomical ACL reconstruction procedure, either single-bundle or double-bundle technique, could provide better knee kinematics than nonanatomic reconstruction [911] and promising clinical results [1220]. Appropriate anatomic evaluation of the native ACL for each individual patient can provide critical information for planning ACL reconstruction in an anatomic fashion, while postoperative evaluation of the reconstructed ACL graft location could predict the prognosis after the surgery and give valuable feedback to surgeons. In theory, a conventional two-dimensional assessment cannot fully recognize the three-dimensional structure of the original anatomy. Therefore, three-dimensional imaging analysis of the knee has been progressively developed over the last few years [21, 22].

The purpose of this paper is to introduce the progression of imaging technology into three-dimensional analysis on various fields of research related to the ACL and to suggest the future direction of ACL-related anatomic studies.

2. Progression of the Imaging Technology for the ACL Anatomy

2.1. Image Analysis for the ACL Insertion Site

Anatomic research investigating the native ACL location has been developed over the last several decades. In 1975, Girgis et al. [23] investigated the cruciate ligaments in cadaveric knees focusing on their function and first recognized the different functional bundles of the ACL, the anteromedial (AM) and posterolateral (PL) bundles [23]. The relative positions between the two bundles were identified, while the exact locations were not determined due to lack of baseline anatomic landmarks and scales. In the 1980s, relative distances from the anatomic landmarks, such as the anterior edge of the intercondylar notch, lateral condyle surface, and cartilage margin, on a hypothetical sagittal plane which was usually set on the lateral wall of the intercondylar notch were often used for describing the anatomical location. One of the examples of the two-dimensional anatomic description on the lateral wall of the intercondylar notch is the isometric mapping introduced by Sidles et al., which showed the relationship between the anatomical ACL graft location on a hypothetical plane and the length change of the graft [24]. They revealed that the original ACL insertion site is different from the isometric point where the graft does not change length during flexion-extension movement, whereas some cadaveric experiments at that time demonstrated that the anatomical location of the original ACL could produce the isometric length change pattern of the ACL graft [25, 26]. This disparity of the results could be caused by lack of common anatomic definition. In the 1990s, two-dimensional anatomical scales, such as the “clock-face” reference and quadrant method, were developed as a fixed and universal scaling method to describe the anatomical location of the ACL insertion site and graft placement. The “clock-face” reference has been utilized for referring the coronal position of the ACL insertion site and graft placement [2729]. This reference system is able to be adopted for arthroscopic images [30]. However, a recent study shows that the interobserver variability is still high using the clock-face reference [31]. Interestingly, Siebold et al. demonstrated that the AM and PL were aligned at the same level on the “clock-face” reference, at 1:30 o’clock, when the knee flexed at 102 degrees [32]. It reversely implied that the anatomical location indicated by the clock-face reference can be easily modified by changing knee flexion angle. This critical flaw of the “clock-face” reference has been frequently pointed out [33, 34]. In the meantime, the quadrant method, originally described by Bernard et al. [35], is the most commonly used reference for the location of the ACL on the lateral X-ray of the distal femur [3638]. However, this system depends crucially on an unstable baseline, Blumensaat’s line, which is a projected line of the intercondylar roof on the lateral X-ray of the distal femur. Farrow et al. [39] demonstrated by cadaver experiment that the posterior edge of Blumensaat’s line cannot be consistently recognized [39]. Also, Berg et al. [40] reported the large variability in the angle measurement of Blumensaat’s line against the femoral shaft [40]. In addition, the anatomical location indicated by this system cannot be reproduced under arthroscopy. Also, the true lateral view of the distal femur is also extremely difficult to achieve by intraoperative fluoroscopy. Therefore, clinical value of this technique is assumed to be limited.

As anatomic double bundle ACL reconstruction was introduced in the 2000s, meticulous investigations of bony landmarks were conducted to identify useful landmarks which are available under arthroscopy and can be used for precise graft placements. Three-dimensional (3D) CT images contributed to this decade’s progress of anatomic research. Purnell et al. [41] demonstrated that the lateral intercondylar ridge, formally known as “resident’s ridge” [42], was clearly shown by the 3D CT image and can be defined as the anterior edge of the ACL original insertion site [41]. Furthermore, Ferretti et al. [43] observed the bifurcate ridge on the lower third of the lateral wall which separates the AM and PL bundles [43], which can also be recognized by 3D CT image [44]. Although these tiny bony ridges are not always visible under arthroscopy [45], these osseous landmarks provides useful information for identifying the original ACL insertion site and performing the ACL reconstruction in an anatomic fashion [44]. Further advantage of the three-dimensional CT is the ability to arrange the rotation of the 3D image in a standardized orientation, providing consistent mapping of the ACL tunnel location [21]. This technique can be used for accurate and repeatable analysis of the ACL graft tunnel locations after reconstruction [3].

The progress of CT imaging technique from two- to three-dimensional has contributed significantly to the anatomic research of the ACL. Similar progress is still warranted for MRI because of its capacity to evaluate soft-tissue structures.

2.2. Imaging Analysis for Intercondylar Notch Geometry

Femoral intercondylar notch width has been often discussed as a risk factor for the ACL injury, but it remains unknown if the narrow notch truly leads to ACL injury. Several studies evaluating intercondylar notch width by X-ray or CT reported narrow notch as a risk factor for the ACL injury [4652]. Houseworth et al. [47] measured notch width using notch view, which is an AP view of the knee joint with 45 degrees of knee flexion, and demonstrated a correlation between femoral intercondylar notch stenosis and anterior cruciate ligament injuries [50]. However, other research cast doubt on the impact of the intercondylar notch stenosis [53, 54]. Schickendantz and Weiker [53] prospectively measured the notch width in professional basketball players, and their follow-up survey did not find significant difference of the notch width between ACL injured and noninjured players [53]. Those ambivalent results might be caused by the two-dimensional measurement of the intercondylar notch width. Van Eck et al. [55] compared two-dimensional and three-dimensional measurement of intercondylar notch geometry and demonstrated that there were only moderate correlations between those two measurement [55]. Since X-ray measurement is largely influenced by rotation and angulations [52], three-dimensional measurement is preferable to assess the intercondylar notch geometry.

2.3. Application to Navigation System for the ACL Reconstruction

The development of 3D imaging techniques and increased attention to the anatomic procedure are accompanied with the advanced technology of computers and robots, leading to strong motivation for computer-assisted surgery which could provide real-time imaging feedback with the individualized anatomic information to the surgeons during ACL reconstruction.

In the early 1980s, computer-assisted ACL reconstruction was first attempted by the technique using stereotaxic frame of CT scan for brain surgery [56]. However, it was not commercialized due to excessive cost, invasiveness, and especially prolonged operation time due to computer processing. An imageless navigation system was introduced in the mid-1990s [57], while anatomic placement drew increased attention because of higher revision rate as much as 10% to 40% due to inaccurate tunnel placement [58]. However, navigation-assisted ACL reconstruction was not accepted even though it had inherent accuracy mainly due to the invasiveness by fixing the tracker or exposing radiation and poor cost effectiveness [59]. Meanwhile, experimental use of the navigation system has flourished as an experimental tool. According to Zaffagnini et al., published research using navigation systems could be divided in two groups: anatomical studies (ligament insertion, tunnel position, graft isometry, and impingement) and kinematic studies (Lachman test, anterior drawer test, internal rotation and external rotation, and pivot shift test) [59]. Anatomic studies focused on the evaluation of graft length change and graft impingement against the intercondylar notch roof after ACL reconstruction [57] and the validation of the system accuracy [60], whereas knee kinematics evaluation by navigation system was largely performed to compare various operation techniques [6164].

Navigation systems can be divided into image-guided [65] and imageless systems [56]. In an image-guided system, preoperative images from fluoroscopy, CT, or MRI are inputted and utilized to provide real-time feedback of anatomic information under arthroscopy. In imageless system, which is more common, positional information of anatomical landmarks and joint kinematics is intraoperatively registered for providing anatomic feedback. Nakagawa et al. [65] converted intraoperative 2D fluoroscopic picture into 3D image for preventing blow-out fractures while drilling the femoral tunnel [65]. However, their 2D-3D matching technique did not identify either lateral intercondylar ridge or bifurcate ridge [65].

Navigation systems can provide real-time quantitative feedback during arthroscopic procedure and minimize technical error with enhanced reproducibility and reliability [56, 66]. However, these systems must be improved before wider acceptance of the navigation system, such as invasiveness, cost effectiveness, and complexity of the navigation processing. Moreover, clear and reproducible definition of ideal tunnel position based on concrete anatomic baseline should be established to restore normal joint kinematics after ACL reconstruction.

3. Conclusion

Research on the anatomy of to the ACL has progressed along with the advancement of imaging and navigation technology. Useful bony landmarks for placing the ACL graft at the ideal position can be identified by 3D imaging technique. Also, 3D-CT analysis for the location of the native and reconstructed ACL provides better and more consistent evaluation than conventional “clock-face” reference and roentgenologic quadrant method. Three-dimensional image analysis of the ACL anatomy and its application to the navigation system is becoming more prevalent and reliable for advancing the anatomic studies related to the native ACL and the ACL reconstruction procedure.

Conflict of Interests

The authors declare that they had no conflict of interests in their authorship and publication of this paper. The Department of Orthopaedic Surgery has received funding in support of research and education from Smith & Nephew Inc.

References

  1. B. G. Marchant, F. R. Noyes, S. D. Barber-Westin, and C. Fleckenstein, “Prevalence of nonanatomical graft placement in a series of failed anterior cruciate ligament reconstructions,” The American Journal of Sports Medicine, vol. 38, no. 10, pp. 1987–1996, 2010. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  2. P. Aglietti, R. Buzzi, F. Giron, A. J. V. Simeone, and G. Zaccherotti, “Arthroscopic-assisted anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction with the central third patellar tendon: a 5–8-year follow-up,” Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy, vol. 5, no. 3, pp. 138–144, 1997. View at: Google Scholar
  3. S. Kopf, B. Forsythe, A. K. Wong et al., “Nonanatomic tunnel position in traditional transtibial single-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction evaluated by three-dimensional computed tomography,” Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery. American, vol. 92, no. 6, pp. 1427–1431, 2010. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  4. V. Musahl, A. Plakseychuk, A. VanScyoc et al., “Varying femoral tunnels between the anatomical footprint and isometric positions: effect on kinematics of the anterior cruciate ligaments-reconstructed knee,” The American Journal of Sports Medicine, vol. 33, no. 5, pp. 712–718, 2005. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  5. S. Tashman, D. Collon, K. Anderson, P. Kolowich, and W. Anderst, “Abnormal rotational knee motion during running after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction,” The American Journal of Sports Medicine, vol. 32, no. 4, pp. 975–983, 2004. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  6. E. S. Abebe, G. M. Utturkar, D. C. Taylor et al., “The effects of femoral graft placement on in vivo knee kinematics after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction,” Journal of Biomechanics, vol. 44, pp. 924–929, 2011. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  7. T. P. Andriacchi, A. Mündermann, R. L. Smith, E. J. Alexander, C. O. Dyrby, and S. Koo, “A framework for the in vivo pathomechanics of osteoarthritis at the knee,” Annals of Biomedical Engineering, vol. 32, no. 3, pp. 447–457, 2004. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  8. T. P. Andriacchi, P. L. Briant, S. L. Bevill, and S. Koo, “Rotational changes at the knee after ACL injury cause cartilage thinning,” Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research, no. 442, pp. 39–44, 2006. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  9. E. Kondo, A. M. Merican, K. Yasuda, and A. A. Amis, “Biomechanical comparison of anatomic double-bundle, anatomic single-bundle, and nonanatomic single-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstructions,” The American Journal of Sports Medicine, vol. 39, pp. 279–288, 2011. View at: Google Scholar
  10. M. Yagi, E. K. Wong, A. Kanamori, R. E. Debski, F. H. Fu, and S. L. Y. Woo, “Biomechanical analysis of an anatomic anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction,” The American Journal of Sports Medicine, vol. 30, no. 5, pp. 660–666, 2002. View at: Google Scholar
  11. Y. Yamamoto, W. H. Hsu, S. L. Y. Woo, A. H. Van Scyoc, Y. Takakura, and R. E. Debski, “Knee stability and graft function after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a comparison of a lateral and an anatomical femoral tunnel placement,” The American Journal of Sports Medicine, vol. 32, no. 8, pp. 1825–1832, 2004. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  12. D. Araki, R. Kuroda, S. Kubo et al., “A prospective randomised study of anatomical single-bundle versus double-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: quantitative evaluation using an electromagnetic measurement system,” International Orthopaedics, vol. 35, pp. 439–446, 2011. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  13. P. Aglietti, F. Giron, M. Losco, P. Cuomo, A. Ciardullo, and N. Mondanelli, “Comparison between single- and double-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a prospective, randomized, single-blinded clinical trial,” The American Journal of Sports Medicine, vol. 38, no. 1, pp. 25–34, 2010. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  14. R. Siebold, C. Dehler, and T. Ellert, “Prospective randomized comparison of double-bundle versus single-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction,” Arthroscopy, vol. 24, no. 2, pp. 137–145, 2008. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  15. R. B. Meredick, K. J. Vance, D. Appleby, and J. H. Lubowitz, “Winner of the 2007 systematic review competition: outcome of single-bundle versus double-bundle reconstruction of the anterior cruciate ligament: a meta-analysis,” The American Journal of Sports Medicine, vol. 36, no. 7, pp. 1414–1421, 2008. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  16. F. H. Fu, W. Shen, J. S. Starman, N. Okeke, and J. J. Irrgang, “Primary anatomic double-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a preliminary 2-year prospective study,” The American Journal of Sports Medicine, vol. 36, no. 7, pp. 1263–1274, 2008. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  17. M. Yagi, R. Kuroda, K. Nagamune, S. Yoshiya, and M. Kurosaka, “Double-bundle ACL reconstruction can improve rotational stability,” Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research, no. 454, pp. 100–107, 2007. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  18. T. Muneta, H. Koga, T. Mochizuki et al., “A prospective randomized study of 4-strand semitendinosus tendon anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction comparing single-bundle and double-bundle techniques,” Arthroscopy, vol. 23, no. 6, pp. 618–628, 2007. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  19. T. Järvelä, “Double-bundle versus single-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a prospective, randomize clinical study,” Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy, vol. 15, no. 5, pp. 500–507, 2007. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  20. P. Volpi, M. Cervellin, M. Denti et al., “ACL reconstruction in sports active people: transtibial DB technique with ST/G vs. transtibial SB technique with BPTB: preliminary results,” Injury, vol. 41, no. 11, pp. 1168–1171, 2010. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  21. B. Forsythe, S. Kopf, A. K. Wong et al., “The location of femoral and tibial tunnels in anatomic double-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction analyzed by three-dimensional computed tomography models,” Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery. American, vol. 92, no. 6, pp. 1418–1426, 2010. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  22. S. Lorenz, F. Elser, M. Mitterer, T. Obst, and A. B. Imhoff, “Radiologic evaluation of the insertion sites of the 2 functional bundles of the anterior cruciate ligament using 3-dimensional computed tomography,” The American Journal of Sports Medicine, vol. 37, no. 12, pp. 2368–2376, 2009. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  23. F. G. Girgis, J. L. Marshall, and A. R. S. Al Monajem, “The cruciate ligaments of the knee joint. Anatomical, functional and experimental analysis,” Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research, vol. 106, pp. 216–231, 1975. View at: Google Scholar
  24. J. A. Sidles, R. V. Larson, J. L. Garbini, D. J. Downey, and F. A. Matsen III, “Ligament length relationships in the moving knee,” Journal of Orthopaedic Research, vol. 6, no. 4, pp. 593–610, 1988. View at: Google Scholar
  25. T. Hoogland and B. Hillen, “Intra-articular reconstruction of the anterior cruciate ligament: an experimental study of length changes in different ligament reconstructions,” Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research, vol. 185, pp. 197–202, 1984. View at: Google Scholar
  26. S. F. Schutzer, S. Christen, and R. P. Jakob, “Further observations on the isometricity of the anterior cruciate ligament: an anatomical study using a 6-mm diameter replacement,” Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research, no. 242, pp. 247–255, 1989. View at: Google Scholar
  27. J. Loh, Y. Fukuda, E. Tsuda, R. Steadman, F. Fu, and S. Woo, “Knee stability and graft function following anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: comparison between 11 o'clock and 10 o'clock femoral tunnel placement: 2002 Richard O'Connor Award paper,” Arthroscopy, vol. 19, no. 3, pp. 297–304, 2003. View at: Google Scholar
  28. C. S. Raffo, P. Pizzarello, J. C. Richmond, and N. Pathare, “A reproducible landmark for the tibial tunnel origin in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: avoiding a vertical graft in the coronal plane,” Arthroscopy, vol. 24, no. 7, pp. 843–845, 2008. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  29. J. P. H. Rue, N. Ghodadra, and B. R. Bach Jr., “Femoral tunnel placement in single-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a cadaveric study relating transtibial lateralized femoral tunnel position to the anteromedial and posterolateral bundle femoral origins of the anterior cruciate ligament,” The American Journal of Sports Medicine, vol. 36, no. 1, pp. 73–79, 2008. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  30. A. A. Amis and R. P. Jakob, “Anterior cruciate ligament graft positioning, tensioning and twisting,” Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy, vol. 6, supplement 1, pp. S2–S12, 1998. View at: Google Scholar
  31. M. G. Azzam, C. J. Lenarz, L. D. Farrow, H. A. Israel, D. A. Kieffer, and S. G. Kaar, “Inter- and intraobserver reliability of the clock face representation as used to describe the femoral intercondylar notch,” Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy, vol. 19, no. 8, pp. 1265–1270, 2011. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  32. R. Siebold, T. Ellert, S. Metz, and J. Metz, “Femoral insertions of the anteromedial and posterolateral bundles of the anterior cruciate ligament: morphometry and arthroscopic orientation models for double-bundle bone tunnel placement—a cadaver study,” Arthroscopy, vol. 24, no. 5, pp. 585–592, 2008. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  33. F. H. Fu, “The clock-face reference: simple but nonanatomic,” Arthroscopy, vol. 24, no. 12, pp. 1433–1434, 2008. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  34. A. C. Colvin, W. Shen, V. Musahl, and F. H. Fu, “Avoiding pitfalls in anatomic ACL reconstruction,” Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy, vol. 17, no. 8, pp. 956–963, 2009. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  35. M. Bernard, P. Hertel, H. Hornung, and T. Cierpinski, “Femoral insertion of the ACL: radiographic quadrant method,” The American Journal of Knee Surgery, vol. 10, no. 1, pp. 14–21, 1997. View at: Google Scholar
  36. P. Colombet, J. Robinson, P. Christel et al., “Morphology of anterior cruciate ligament attachments for anatomic reconstruction: a cadaveric dissection and radiographic study,” Arthroscopy, vol. 22, no. 9, pp. 984–992, 2006. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  37. M. Takahashi, M. Doi, M. Abe, D. Suzuki, and A. Nagano, “Anatomical study of the femoral and tibial insertions of the anteromedial and posterolateral bundles of human anterior cruciate ligament,” The American Journal of Sports Medicine, vol. 34, no. 5, pp. 787–792, 2006. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  38. T. Zantop, M. Wellmann, F. H. Fu, and W. Petersen, “Tunnel positioning of anteromedial and posterolateral bundles in anatomic anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: anatomic and radiographic findings,” The American Journal of Sports Medicine, vol. 36, no. 1, pp. 65–72, 2008. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  39. L. D. Farrow, M. R. Chen, D. R. Cooperman, D. B. Goodfellow, and M. S. Robbin, “Radiographic classification of the femoral intercondylar notch posterolateral rim,” Arthroscopy, vol. 24, no. 10, pp. 1109–1114, 2008. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  40. G. E. Berg, S. C. Ta'ala, E. J. Kontanis, and S. S. Leney, “Measuring the intercondylar shelf angle using radiographs: intra- and inter-observer error tests of reliability,” Journal of Forensic Sciences, vol. 52, no. 5, pp. 1020–1024, 2007. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  41. M. L. Purnell, A. I. Larson, and W. Clancy, “Anterior cruciate ligament insertions on the tibia and femur and their relationships to critical bony landmarks using high-resolution volume-rendering computed tomography,” The American Journal of Sports Medicine, vol. 36, no. 11, pp. 2083–2090, 2008. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  42. M. R. Hutchinson and S. A. Ash, “Resident's ridge: assessing the cortical thickness of the lateral wall and roof of the intercondylar notch,” Arthroscopy, vol. 19, no. 9, pp. 931–935, 2003. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  43. M. Ferretti, M. Ekdahl, W. Shen, and F. H. Fu, “Osseous landmarks of the femoral attachment of the anterior cruciate ligament: an anatomic study,” Arthroscopy, vol. 23, no. 11, pp. 1218–1225, 2007. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  44. F. H. Fu and S. S. Jordan, “The lateral intercondylar ridge—a key to anatomic anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction,” Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery. American, vol. 89, no. 10, pp. 2103–2104, 2007. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  45. C. F. van Eck, K. R. Morse, B. P. Lesniak et al., “Does the lateral intercondylar ridge disappear in ACL deficient patients?” Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy, vol. 18, no. 9, pp. 1184–1188, 2010. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  46. A. F. Anderson, A. B. Lipscomb, K. J. Liudahl, and R. B. Addlestone, “Analysis of the intercondylar notch by computed tomography,” The American Journal of Sports Medicine, vol. 15, no. 6, pp. 547–552, 1987. View at: Google Scholar
  47. S. W. Houseworth, V. J. Mauro, B. A. Mellon, and D. A. Kieffer, “The intercondylar notch in acute tears of the anterior cruciate ligament: a computer graphics study,” The American Journal of Sports Medicine, vol. 15, no. 3, pp. 221–224, 1987. View at: Google Scholar
  48. T. O. Souryal, H. A. Moore, and J. P. Evans, “Bilaterality in anterior cruciate ligament injuries: associated intercondylar notch stenosis,” The American Journal of Sports Medicine, vol. 16, no. 5, pp. 449–454, 1988. View at: Google Scholar
  49. T. O. Souryal, T. R. Freeman, and D. M. Daniel, “Intercondylar notch size and anterior cruciate ligament injuries in athletes: a prospective study,” The American Journal of Sports Medicine, vol. 21, no. 4, pp. 535–539, 1993. View at: Google Scholar
  50. R. F. LaPrade, Q. M. Burnett II, and D. M. Daniel, “Femoral intercondylar notch stenosis and correlation to anterior cruciate ligament injuries: a prospective study,” The American Journal of Sports Medicine, vol. 22, no. 2, pp. 198–203, 1994. View at: Google Scholar
  51. K. D. Shelbourne, T. J. Davis, and T. E. Klootwyk, “The relationship between intercondylar notch width of the femur and the incidence of anterior cruciate ligament tears: a prospective study,” The American Journal of Sports Medicine, vol. 26, no. 3, pp. 402–408, 1998. View at: Google Scholar
  52. M. L. Ireland, B. T. Ballantyne, K. Little, and I. S. McClay, “A radiographic analysis of the relationship between the size and shape of the intercondylar notch and anterior cruciate ligament injury,” Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy, vol. 9, no. 4, pp. 200–205, 2001. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  53. M. S. Schickendantz and G. G. Weiker, “The predictive value of radiographs in the evaluation of unilateral and bilateral anterior cruciate ligament injuries,” The American Journal of Sports Medicine, vol. 21, no. 1, pp. 110–113, 1993. View at: Google Scholar
  54. S. Lombardo, P. M. Sethi, and C. Starkey, “Intercondylar notch stenosis is not a risk factor for anterior cruciate ligament tears in professional male basketball players: an 11-year prospective study,” The American Journal of Sports Medicine, vol. 33, no. 1, pp. 29–34, 2005. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  55. C. F. van Eck, C. A. Q. Martins, S. Kopf, P. Lertwanich, F. H. Fu, and S. Tashman, “Correlation between the 2-dimensional notch width and the 3-dimensional notch volume: a cadaveric study,” Arthroscopy, vol. 27, pp. 207–212, 2011. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  56. D. W. Jackson and T. M. Simon, “History of computer-assisted orthopedic surgery (CAOS) in sports medicine,” Sports Medicine and Arthroscopy Review, vol. 16, no. 2, pp. 62–66, 2008. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  57. V. Dessenne, S. Lavallée, R. Julliard, R. Orti, S. Martelli, and P. Cinquin, “Computer-assisted knee anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: first clinical tests,” Journal of Image Guided Surgery, vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 59–64, 1995. View at: Google Scholar
  58. M. J. Wetzler, A. R. Bartolozzi, M. J. Gillespie, D. L. Rubenstein, M. G. Ciccotti, and L. S. Miller, “Revision anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction,” Operative Techniques in Orthopaedics, vol. 6, no. 3, pp. 181–189, 1996. View at: Google Scholar
  59. S. Zaffagnini, T. V. Klos, and S. Bignozzi, “Computer-assisted anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: an evidence-based approach of the first 15 years,” Arthroscopy, vol. 26, no. 4, pp. 546–554, 2010. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  60. T. V. S. Klos, R. J. E. Habets, A. Z. Banks, S. A. Banks, R. J. J. Devilee, and F. F. Cook, “Computer assistance in arthroscopic anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction,” Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research, no. 354, pp. 65–69, 1998. View at: Google Scholar
  61. V. Musahl, J. E. Voos, P. F. O'Loughlin et al., “Comparing stability of different single-and double-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction techniques: a cadaveric study using navigation,” Arthroscopy, vol. 26, no. 9, pp. S41–S48, 2010. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  62. J. Y. Ho, A. Gardiner, V. Shah, and M. E. Steiner, “Equal kinematics between central anatomic single-bundle and double-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstructions,” Arthroscopy, vol. 25, no. 5, pp. 464–472, 2009. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  63. A. Ferretti, E. Monaco, L. Labianca, A. De Carli, B. Maestri, and F. Conteduca, “Double-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a comprehensive kinematic study using navigation,” The American Journal of Sports Medicine, vol. 37, no. 8, pp. 1548–1553, 2009. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  64. R. H. Brophy and A. D. Pearle, “Single-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a comparison of conventional, central, and horizontal single-bundle virtual graft positions,” The American Journal of Sports Medicine, vol. 37, no. 7, pp. 1317–1323, 2009. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  65. T. Nakagawa, H. Takeda, K. Nakajima et al., “Intraoperative 3-dimensional imaging-based navigation-assisted anatomic double-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction,” Arthroscopy, vol. 24, no. 10, pp. 1161–1167, 2008. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  66. P. Kodali, S. Yang, and J. Koh, “Computer-assisted surgery for anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction,” Sports Medicine and Arthroscopy Review, vol. 16, no. 2, pp. 67–76, 2008. View at: Google Scholar

Copyright © 2012 Yuichi Hoshino et al. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.


More related articles

1706 Views | 810 Downloads | 0 Citations
 PDF  Download Citation  Citation
 Download other formatsMore
 Order printed copiesOrder

Related articles

We are committed to sharing findings related to COVID-19 as quickly and safely as possible. Any author submitting a COVID-19 paper should notify us at help@hindawi.com to ensure their research is fast-tracked and made available on a preprint server as soon as possible. We will be providing unlimited waivers of publication charges for accepted articles related to COVID-19. Sign up here as a reviewer to help fast-track new submissions.