| Objective:The aims of this study were to compare the differences between the two anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction techniques (anteromedial (AM) portal technique and transtibial (TT) technique) using postoperative magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), radiology, and the clinical results.Methods:Between October 2007 and October 2009,70 consecutive patients, followed by an arthroscopically assisted ACL reconstruction with either an AM technique or TT technique, were enrolled in this study. The patients were divided into two groups:AM group (33 patients) and the TT group (37 patients). All the patients including both groups in this study underwent postoperative MRI and radiology, and clinical evaluation (Lysholm score and Lachman test). The orientation of the ACL ligament or graft was measured using three different methods:the sagittal ACL angle, the ACL-Blumensaat line angle, and the orientation of femoral tunnel by Amis's method.Result:Postoperatively Lysholm score were 88.4 in the AM group and 82.0 in the TT group after six months, and the Lachman test was significantly different from each other after one year (P<0.05). The mean sagittal ACL angle in the TT group (61.34°±3.05°) was significantly higher than in AM group (52.88°±2.78°) and normal group (51.89°±1.95°) (P<0.05). The mean ACL-Blumensaat line angle in the TT group (14.17°±4.59°) was also significantly higher than in AM group (4.96°±0.77°) and normal group (4.49°±0.83°) (P<0.05). With Amis's method, the orientation of femoral tunnel in AM group (62.1±2.2%) was much closer to the normal group (61.8%±3.1%) but was significantly different from that of TT group (48.8±6.9%) (P<0.05).Conclusion:Drilling the femoral tunnel through the anteromedial arthroscopy portal rather than using a transtibial drilling technique provides the better opportunity to place a femoral tunnel precisely in the central anatomic footprint of the ACL. |
