Subscribe to RSS
DOI: 10.1055/a-2664-7701
The Influence of Primary Femoral Bone Tunnel Position on Postoperative Outcomes and Femoral Bone Tunnel Creation in Revision ACL Reconstruction

Abstract
The impact of primary femoral tunnel position on rerupture rates following revision anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) remains unclear. This study aimed to explore whether the anatomical placement of the primary femoral tunnel affects rerupture risk, tunnel positioning at revision surgery, and postoperative clinical outcomes. Among 165 patients who underwent revision ACLR at our institution between 2018 and 2022, 78 cases with a minimum of 2 years of follow-up were included. The primary femoral tunnel position was evaluated using Bernard and Hertel's quadrant method on 3D CT scans. Patients were categorized into group A (anatomical position) and group N (nonanatomical position). Rerupture rate, tunnel position at revision ACLR, and clinical outcomes were compared between the groups. Subgroup analyses were conducted based on primary surgical technique (single-bundle [SB] vs. double-bundle [DB]). Additionally, multivariate logistic regression analysis was performed to identify independent predictors of rerupture. Rerupture occurred in three of 39 cases (7.7%) in group A and six of 39 cases (15.4%) in group N (p = 0.48). There were no significant differences in age, sex, height, weight, sports type, or posterior tibial slope. Anatomical tunnel placement at revision was achieved in 94.9% of group A and 79.5% of group N (p = 0.087). No significant differences in Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score or ACL-return to sport after injury scale were observed at 2 years postoperatively. Subgroup analysis based on primary surgical technique (SB vs. DB) revealed no significant differences in rerupture rates or femoral tunnel positioning at revision. Multivariate logistic regression identified anatomical tunnel placement during the revision surgery as the only independent protective factor against rerupture (odds ratio: 0.145; 95% confidence interval: 0.022–0.951; p = 0.044). Anatomical tunnel placement during primary ACLR appears to be a key factor associated with a reduced risk of rerupture following revision ACLR. These exploratory findings underscore the importance of accurate tunnel positioning and should be interpreted cautiously due to the limited sample size.
Level of Evidence Level III.
Publication History
Received: 29 March 2025
Accepted: 23 July 2025
Accepted Manuscript online:
24 July 2025
Article published online:
07 August 2025
© 2025. Thieme. All rights reserved.
Thieme Medical Publishers, Inc.
333 Seventh Avenue, 18th Floor, New York, NY 10001, USA
-
References
- 1 Duncan BR, Reid M, Kleihege J. et al. Comparison of psychological readiness to return to sport after primary versus revision anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Orthop J Sports Med 2023; 11 (05) 23 259671231159408
- 2 Erickson BJ, Cvetanovich GL, Frank RM, Riff AJ, Bach Jr BR. Revision ACL reconstruction: a critical analysis review. JBJS Rev 2017; 5 (06) e1-e1
- 3 Glogovac G, Schumaier AP, Grawe BM. Return to sport following revision anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction in athletes: a systematic review. Arthroscopy 2019; 35 (07) 2222-2230
- 4 Marx JS, Plantz MA, Gerlach EB. et al. Revision ACL reconstruction has higher incidence of 30-day hospital readmission, reoperation, and surgical complications relative to primary procedures. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 2022; 30 (05) 1605-1610
- 5 Mohan R, Webster KE, Johnson NR, Stuart MJ, Hewett TE, Krych AJ. Clinical outcomes in revision anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a meta-analysis. Arthroscopy 2018; 34 (01) 289-300
- 6 Svantesson E, Hamrin Senorski E, Kristiansson F, Alentorn-Geli E, Westin O, Samuelsson K. Comparison of concomitant injuries and patient-reported outcome in patients that have undergone both primary and revision ACL reconstruction-a national registry study. J Orthop Surg Res 2020; 15 (01) 9-9
- 7 Wolfson TS, Mannino B, Owens BD, Waterman BR, Alaia MJ. Tunnel management in revision anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: current concepts. Am J Sports Med 2023; 51 (02) 545-556
- 8 Goto K, Menetrey J. (2020) Surgical Technique: What We Would Do in Different Situations—Graft Choice, One or Two Steps, Fixation, Associated Lesions. In: Hirschmann M, Kon E, Samuelsson K, Denti M, Dejour D. (eds) ESSKA Instructional Course Lecture Book. Springer, Berlin: Heidelberg; . Accessed July 30, 2025 at: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-61264-4_21
- 9 Condello V, Beaufilis P, Becker R. et al. Management of anterior cruciate ligament revision in adults: the 2022 ESSKA consensus: part II-surgical strategy. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 2023; 31 (11) 4652-4661
- 10 Bernard M, Hertel P, Hornung H, Cierpinski T. Femoral insertion of the ACL. Radiographic quadrant method. Am J Knee Surg 1997; 10 (01) 14-21 , discussion 21–22
- 11 Goto K, Honda E, Iwaso H. et al. Age under 20 years, pre-operative participation in pivoting sports, and steep posterior tibial slope of more than 12° are risk factors for graft failure after double-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. J Exp Orthop 2024; 11 (04) e70102
- 12 Nakamura N, Takeuchi R, Sawaguchi T, Ishikawa H, Saito T, Goldhahn S. Cross-cultural adaptation and validation of the Japanese Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS). J Orthop Sci 2011; 16 (05) 516-523
- 13 Goto K, Sanada T, Honda E. et al. Risk factors for anteroposterior laxity increase over time in double-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction using hamstring autografts. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 2025; 33 (01) 157-166
- 14 Parkar AP, Adriaensen MEAPM, Vindfeld S, Solheim E. The anatomic centers of the femoral and tibial insertions of the anterior cruciate ligament: a systematic review of imaging and cadaveric studies reporting normal center locations. Am J Sports Med 2017; 45 (09) 2180-2188
- 15 Hirohata K, Aizawa J, Furuya H. et al. The Japanese version of the anterior cruciate ligament-return to sport after injury (ACL-RSI) scale has acceptable validity and reliability. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 2020; 28 (08) 2519-2525
- 16 Anand BS, Feller JA, Richmond AK, Webster KE. Return-to-sport outcomes after revision anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction surgery. Am J Sports Med 2016; 44 (03) 580-584
- 17 Matassi F, Giabbani N, Arnaldi E. et al. Controversies in ACL revision surgery: Italian expert group consensus and state of the art. J Orthop Traumatol 2022; 23 (01) 32
- 18 Inoue J, Giusto JD, Dadoo S. et al. Nonanatomic femoral tunnel placement increases the risk of subsequent meniscal surgery after ACLR: part II-patients without recurrent ACL injury. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 2024; 32 (11) 2780-2789
- 19 Lim HC, Yoon YC, Wang JH, Bae JH. Anatomical versus non-anatomical single bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a cadaveric study of comparison of knee stability. Clin Orthop Surg 2012; 4 (04) 249-255
- 20 Byrne KJ, Hughes JD, Gibbs C. et al. Non-anatomic tunnel position increases the risk of revision anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 2022; 30 (04) 1388-1395
- 21 Burnham JM, Pfeiffer T, Shin JJ, Herbst E, Fu F. Bony morphologic factors affecting injury risk, rotatory stability, outcomes, and re-tear rate after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Ann Jt 2017; 2 (07) 44
- 22 Tokura T, Matsushita T, Nishida K. et al. Younger age, hyperextended knee, concomitant meniscectomy and large prerevision anterior tibial translation are associated with graft failure after the revision anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. J Exp Orthop 2024; 11 (03) e70021
- 23 Southam BR, Colosimo AJ, Grawe B. Underappreciated factors to consider in revision anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a current concepts review. Orthop J Sports Med 2018; 6 (01) 2325967117751689
- 24 Heffner M, Chang RN, Royse KE, Ding DY, Maletis GB. Association between graft type and risk of repeat revision anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a cohort study of 1747 patients. Am J Sports Med 2023; 51 (06) 1434-1440
- 25 Shi WL, Gao YT, Zhang KY. et al. Femoral tunnel malposition, increased lateral tibial slope, and decreased notch width index are risk factors for non-traumatic anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction failure. Arthroscopy 2024; 40 (02) 424-434.e3
- 26 Morgan JA, Dahm D, Levy B, Stuart MJ. MARS Study Group. Femoral tunnel malposition in ACL revision reconstruction. J Knee Surg 2012; 25 (05) 361-368
- 27 Vasavada K, Vasavada V, Moran J. et al; MARS Group. A novel machine learning model to predict revision ACL reconstruction failure in the MARS cohort. Orthop J Sports Med 2024; 12 (11) 23 259671241291920
- 28 Iriuchishima T, Goto B. Systematic review of surgical technique and tunnel target points and placement in anatomical single-bundle ACL reconstruction. J Knee Surg 2021; 34 (14) 1531-1538
- 29 Budny J, Fox J, Rauh M, Fineberg M. Emerging trends in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. J Knee Surg 2017; 30 (01) 63-69