J Knee Surg 2020; 33(08): 825-831
DOI: 10.1055/s-0039-1688557
Original Article
Thieme Medical Publishers 333 Seventh Avenue, New York, NY 10001, USA.

Different Strategies in Making Transseptal Portal for the Different Purposes

Yong Seuk Lee
1   Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Seoul National University Bundang Hospital, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seongnam, Gyeonggi-do, Korea
,
Tae Woo Kim
1   Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Seoul National University Bundang Hospital, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seongnam, Gyeonggi-do, Korea
,
Eui Soo Lee
1   Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Seoul National University Bundang Hospital, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seongnam, Gyeonggi-do, Korea
,
Kyoung Hwan Lee
1   Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Seoul National University Bundang Hospital, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seongnam, Gyeonggi-do, Korea
,
Seung Hoon Lee
2   Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Incheon Medical Center, Incheon, Korea
› Author Affiliations
Further Information

Publication History

07 December 2018

18 March 2019

Publication Date:
08 May 2019 (online)

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to find the most suitable and safe position of the transseptal portal in anatomic anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) and posterior cruciate ligament (PCL) reconstructions. The hypothesis of this study was that area and position of the transseptal portal are different between ACL and PCL reconstructions for the observation of native footprint. A matched-pair comparison study was conducted on the arthroscopic images of 100 consecutive patients who underwent ACL reconstruction and 50 consecutive patients who underwent PCL reconstruction. The transseptum was divided into six compartments. The opened compartments for each surgery were then evaluated to find which anatomical structures are well seen. The anterior middle and upper parts were necessary for the ACL reconstruction, whereas middle and lower portions of the anterior and posterior compartments were necessary for the PCL reconstruction. A larger opening was necessary for PCL reconstruction than that for ACL reconstruction. The ACL posterior one-third, ACL femoral attachment, and apex of the deep cartilage margin (DCM) were viewed in 100% of the patients during ACL reconstruction. The PCL posterior one-third, PCL tibial attachment, PCL fovea margin, and medial meniscus around posterior margin were always viewed during PCL reconstruction. The anterior part of the septum, from the middle to the upper portions of the transseptum, was necessary to be opened for visualization of the femoral footprint and DCM of the lateral femoral condyle during ACL reconstruction. The anterior and posterior parts of the septum, from the middle to the lower portions of the transseptum, were necessary for excellent visualization of the PCL tibial footprint during PCL reconstruction. These paths of the transseptal portal for each surgery will help surgeons obtain both anatomic footprint restoration and maximal remnant preservation through the most suitable and safe means. This is a case–control study; level of evidence is 3.

 
  • References

  • 1 Jackson WF, van der Tempel WM, Salmon LJ, Williams HA, Pinczewski LA. Endoscopically-assisted single-bundle posterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: results at minimum ten-year follow-up. J Bone Joint Surg Br 2008; 90 (10) 1328-1333
  • 2 Jepsen CF, Lundberg-Jensen AK, Faunoe P. Does the position of the femoral tunnel affect the laxity or clinical outcome of the anterior cruciate ligament-reconstructed knee? A clinical, prospective, randomized, double-blind study. Arthroscopy 2007; 23 (12) 1326-1333
  • 3 Yasuda K, Kondo E, Ichiyama H, Tanabe Y, Tohyama H. Clinical evaluation of anatomic double-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction procedure using hamstring tendon grafts: comparisons among 3 different procedures. Arthroscopy 2006; 22 (03) 240-251
  • 4 Takahashi T, Ohsawa T, Hagiwara K, Kimura M, Takeshita K. Femoral attachment of anterior cruciate ligament remnant tissue influences the stability of the anterior cruciate ligament-injured knee in patients over 40 years old. Asia Pac J Sports Med Arthrosc Rehabil Technol 2017; 9: 1-5
  • 5 Borbon CA, Mouzopoulos G, Siebold R. Why perform an ACL augmentation?. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 2012; 20 (02) 245-251
  • 6 Lee BI, Min KD, Choi HS, Kim JB, Kim ST. Arthroscopic anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction with the tibial-remnant preserving technique using a hamstring graft. Arthroscopy 2006; 22 (03) 340.e1-340.e7
  • 7 Adachi N, Ochi M, Uchio Y, Iwasa J, Ryoke K, Kuriwaka M. Mechanoreceptors in the anterior cruciate ligament contribute to the joint position sense. Acta Orthop Scand 2002; 73 (03) 330-334
  • 8 Zhu M, Li S, Su Z. , et al. Tibial tunnel placement in anatomic anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a comparison study of outcomes between patient-specific drill template versus conventional arthroscopic techniques. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 2018; 138 (04) 515-525
  • 9 Ahn JH, Lee YS, Jeong HJ. , et al. Comparison of transtibial and retrograde outside-in techniques of anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction in terms of graft nature and clinical outcomes: a case control study using 3T MRI. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 2017; 137 (03) 357-365
  • 10 Ahn JH, Jeong HJ, Ko CS, Ko TS, Kim JH. Three-dimensional reconstruction computed tomography evaluation of tunnel location during single-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a comparison of transtibial and 2-incision tibial tunnel-independent techniques. Clin Orthop Surg 2013; 5 (01) 26-35
  • 11 Ahn JH, Lee SH, Choi SH, Lim TK. Magnetic resonance imaging evaluation of anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction using quadrupled hamstring tendon autografts: comparison of remnant bundle preservation and standard technique. Am J Sports Med 2010; 38 (09) 1768-1777
  • 12 Ahn JH, Lee YS, Ha HC. Anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction with preservation of remnant bundle using hamstring autograft: technical note. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 2009; 129 (08) 1011-1015
  • 13 Ahn JH, Lee YS, Lee SH. Creation of an anatomic femoral tunnel with minimal damage to the remnant bundle in remnant-preserving anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction using an outside-in technique. Arthrosc Tech 2014; 3 (01) e175-e179
  • 14 Lubowitz JH, Akhavan S, Waterman BR, Aalami-Harandi A, Konicek J. Technique for creating the anterior cruciate ligament femoral socket: optimizing femoral footprint anatomic restoration using outside-in drilling. Arthroscopy 2013; 29 (03) 522-528
  • 15 Ahn JH, Lee YS, Ko TS, Shin JY. Accuracy and reproducibility of the femoral tunnel with different viewing techniques in the ACL reconstruction. Orthopedics 2016; 39 (06) e1085-e1091
  • 16 Elazab A, Lee YS, Kang SG. Femoral footprint reconstruction with a direct viewing of the posterior insertion using a trans-septal portal in the outside-in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Arthrosc Tech 2015; 5 (01) e49-e54
  • 17 Lee YS, Ko TS, Ahn JH. , et al. Comparison of tibial tunnel techniques in posterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: C-arm versus anatomic fovea landmark. Arthroscopy 2016; 32 (03) 487-492
  • 18 Ohishi T, Takahashi M, Suzuki D, Matsuyama Y. Arthroscopic approach to the posterior compartment of the knee using a posterior transseptal portal. World J Orthop 2015; 6 (07) 505-512
  • 19 Lee YS, Ahn JH, Min BH, Nha KW. Arthroscopic loose body removal and cyst decompression using a posterior trans-septal portal in the blind spot during knee arthroscopy--technical report. Knee 2011; 18 (01) 55-58
  • 20 Yoo JH, Kim EH, Min KD, Lee BI. Arthroscopic excision of the ganglion in the posterior septum by posterior trans-septal portal: report of two cases. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 2009; 129 (08) 1047-1051
  • 21 Kim JH, Shin DE, Dan JM, Nam KS, Ahn TK, Lee DH. Arthroscopic suture anchor repair of posterior root attachment injury in medial meniscus: technical note. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 2009; 129 (08) 1085-1088
  • 22 Ahn JH, Wang JH, Lim HC. , et al. Double transosseous pull out suture technique for transection of posterior horn of medial meniscus. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 2009; 129 (03) 387-392
  • 23 Ahn JH, Lee YS, Chang MJ, Kum DH, Kim YH. Anatomical graft passage in transtibial posterior cruciate ligament reconstruction using bioabsorbable tibial cross pin fixation. Orthopedics 2009; 32 (02) 96
  • 24 Elazab A, Lee YS, Kang SG. Suspensory anterior tibial fixation in the anatomic transtibial posterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Arthrosc Tech 2016; 5 (01) e71-e77
  • 25 Ahn JH, Lee YS, Choi SH, Chang MJ, Lee DK. Single-bundle transtibial posterior cruciate ligament reconstruction using a bioabsorbable cross-pin tibial back side fixation. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 2013; 21 (05) 1023-1028
  • 26 Lee YS, Ahn JH, Jung YB. , et al. Transtibial double bundle posterior cruciate ligament reconstruction using TransFix tibial fixation. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 2007; 15 (08) 973-977