Top

Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy

Published in:

01-05-2014 | Knee

Anatomic single- versus double-bundle ACL reconstruction: a meta-analysis

Authors: Neel Desai, Haukur Björnsson, Volker Musahl, Mohit Bhandari, Max Petzold, Freddie H. Fu, Kristian Samuelsson

Published in: Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy | Issue 5/2014

Abstract

Purpose

To determine whether anatomic double-bundle anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction compared to anatomic single-bundle ACL reconstruction more effectively restored antero–posterior (A–P) laxity, rotatory laxity and reduced frequency of graft rupture. Our hypothesis was that anatomic double-bundle ACL reconstruction results in superior rotational knee laxity and fewer graft ruptures due to its double-bundle tension pattern, compared with anatomic single-bundle ACL reconstruction.

Methods

An electronic search was performed using the PubMed, EMBASE and Cochrane Library databases. All therapeutic trials written in English reporting knee kinematic outcomes and graft rupture rates of primary anatomic double- versus single-bundle ACL reconstruction were included. Only clinical studies of levels I–II evidence were included. Data regarding kinematic tests were extracted and included pivot-shift test, Lachman test, anterior drawer test, KT-1000 measurements, A–P laxity measures using navigation and total internal–external (IRER) laxity measured using navigation, as well as graft failure frequency.

Results

A total of 7,154 studies were identified of which 15 papers (8 randomized controlled trials and 7 prospective cohort studies, n = 970 patients) met the eligibility criteria. Anatomic ACL double-bundle reconstruction demonstrated less anterior laxity using KT-1000 arthrometer with a standard mean difference (SMD) = 0.36 (95 % CI 0.214–0.513, p < 0.001) and less A–P laxity measured with navigation (SMD = 0.29 95 % CI 0.01–0.565, p = 0.042). Anatomic double-bundle ACL reconstruction did not lead to significant improvements in pivot-shift test, Lachman test, anterior drawer test, total IRER or graft failure rates compared to anatomic single-bundle ACL reconstruction.

Conclusion

Anatomic double-bundle ACL reconstruction is superior to anatomic single-bundle reconstruction in terms of restoration of knee kinematics, primarily A–P laxity. Whether these improvements of laxity result in long-term improvement of clinical meaningful outcomes remains uncertain.

Level of evidence

II.

Aglietti P, Giron F, Losco M, Cuomo P, Ciardullo A, Mondanelli N (2010) Comparison between single-and double-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a prospective, randomized, single-blinded clinical trial. Am J Sports Med 38(1):25–34PubMedCrossRef

Amis AA, Dawkins GP (1991) Functional anatomy of the anterior cruciate ligament. Fibre bundle actions related to ligament replacements and injuries. J Bone Joint Surg 73(2):260–267

Araki D, Kuroda R, Kubo S, Fujita N, Tei K, Nishimoto K, Hoshino Y, Matsushita T, Matsumoto T, Nagamune K, Kurosaka M (2011) A prospective randomised study of anatomical single-bundle versus double-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: quantitative evaluation using an electromagnetic measurement system. Int Orthop 35(3):439–446PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef

Fujita N, Kuroda R, Matsumoto T, Yamaguchi M, Yagi M, Matsumoto A, Kubo S, Matsushita T, Hoshino Y, Nishimoto K, Araki D, Kurosaka M (2011) Comparison of the clinical outcome of double-bundle, anteromedial single-bundle, and posterolateral single-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction using hamstring tendon graft with minimum 2-year follow-up. Arthroscopy 27(7):906–913PubMedCrossRef

Gadikota HR, Seon JK, Chen CH, Wu JL, Gill TJ, Li G (2011) In vitro and intraoperative laxities after single-bundle and double-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstructions. Arthroscopy 27(6):849–860PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef

Gobbi A, Mahajan V, Karnatzikos G, Nakamura N (2011) Single- versus double-bundle ACL reconstruction: is there any difference in stability and function at 3-year followup? Clin Orthop Rel Res 470(3):824–834CrossRef

Harner CD, Fu FH, Irrgang JJ, Vogrin TM (2001) Anterior and posterior cruciate ligament reconstruction in the new millennium: a global perspective. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 9(6):330–336PubMedCrossRef

Hemmerich A, van der Merwe W, Batterham M, Vaughan CL (2011) Knee rotational laxity in a randomized comparison of single- versus double-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Am J Sports Med 39(1):48–56PubMedCrossRef

Higgins JP, Altman DG, Gotzsche PC, Juni P, Moher D, Oxman AD, Savovic J, Schulz KF, Weeks L, Sterne JA, Cochrane Bias Methods G, Cochrane Statistical Methods G (2011) The Cochrane Collaboration’s tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials. BMJ 343:d5928PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef

10.

Higgins JP, Thompson SG (2002) Quantifying heterogeneity in a meta-analysis. Stat Med 21(11):1539–1558PubMedCrossRef

11.

Hussein M, van Eck CF, Cretnik A, Dinevski D, Fu FH (2012) Individualized anterior cruciate ligament surgery: a prospective study comparing anatomic single- and double-bundle reconstruction. Am J Sports Med 40(8):1781–1788PubMedCrossRef

12.

Hussein M, van Eck CF, Cretnik A, Dinevski D, Fu FH (2012) Prospective randomized clinical evaluation of conventional single-bundle, anatomic single-bundle, and anatomic double-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: 281 cases with 3- to 5-year follow-up. Am J Sports Med 40(3):512–520PubMedCrossRef

13.

Ishibashi Y, Tsuda E, Fukuda A, Tsukada H, Toh S (2008) Intraoperative biomechanical evaluation of anatomic anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction using a navigation system: comparison of hamstring tendon and bone-patellar tendon-bone graft. Am J Sports Med 36(10):1903–1912PubMedCrossRef

14.

Jarvela T (2007) Double-bundle versus single-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a prospective, randomize clinical study. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 15(5):500–507PubMedCrossRef

15.

Jonsson H, Riklund-Ahlstrom K, Lind J (2004) Positive pivot shift after ACL reconstruction predicts later osteoarthrosis: 63 patients followed 5–9 years after surgery. Acta Orthop Scand 75(5):594–599PubMedCrossRef

16.

Kanaya A, Ochi M, Deie M, Adachi N, Nishimori M, Nakamae A (2009) Intraoperative evaluation of anteroposterior and rotational stabilities in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: lower femoral tunnel placed single-bundle versus double-bundle reconstruction. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 17(8):907–913PubMedCrossRef

17.

Kocher MS, Steadman JR, Briggs KK, Sterett WI, Hawkins RJ (2004) Relationships between objective assessment of ligament stability and subjective assessment of symptoms and function after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Am J Sports Med 32(3):629–634PubMedCrossRef

18.

Kocher MS, Tucker R, Briggs KK (2005) Relationship between subjective and objective assessment of outcomes after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. J Knee Surg 18(1):73–81PubMed

19.

Kondo E, Merican AM, Yasuda K, Amis AA (2011) Biomechanical comparison of anatomic double-bundle, anatomic single-bundle, and nonanatomic single-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstructions. Am J Sports Med 39(2):279–288PubMedCrossRef

20.

Kondo E, Yasuda K, Azuma H, Tanabe Y, Yagi T (2008) Prospective clinical comparisons of anatomic double-bundle versus single-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction procedures in 328 consecutive patients. Am J Sports Med 36(9):1675–1687PubMedCrossRef

21.

Kuroda R, Hoshino Y, Araki D, Nishizawa Y, Nagamune K, Matsumoto T, Kubo S, Matsushita T, Kurosaka M (2012) Quantitative measurement of the pivot shift, reliability, and clinical applications. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 20(4):686–691PubMedCrossRef

22.

Lee MC, Seong SC, Lee S, Chang CB, Park YK, Jo H, Kim CH (2007) Vertical femoral tunnel placement results in rotational knee laxity after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Arthroscopy 23(7):771–778PubMedCrossRef

23.

Lee S, Kim H, Jang J, Seong SC, Lee MC (2012) Comparison of anterior and rotatory laxity using navigation between single- and double-bundle ACL reconstruction: prospective randomized trial. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 20(4):752–761PubMedCrossRef

24.

Lohmander LS, Englund PM, Dahl LL, Roos EM (2007) The long-term consequence of anterior cruciate ligament and meniscus injuries: osteoarthritis. Am J Sports Med 35(10):1756–1769PubMedCrossRef

25.

Meredick RB, Vance KJ, Appleby D, Lubowitz JH (2008) Outcome of single-bundle versus double-bundle reconstruction of the anterior cruciate ligament: a meta-analysis. Am J Sports Med 36(7):1414–1421PubMedCrossRef

26.

Misonoo G, Kanamori A, Ida H, Miyakawa S, Ochiai N (2011) Evaluation of tibial rotational stability of single-bundle vs. anatomical double-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction during a high-demand activity—a quasi-randomized trial. Knee 19(2):87–93PubMedCrossRef

27.

Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman DG, Group P (2009) Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. BMJ 339:b2535PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef

28.

Muneta T, Koga H, Mochizuki T, Ju YJ, Hara K, Nimura A, Yagishita K, Sekiya I (2007) A prospective randomized study of 4-strand semitendinosus tendon anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction comparing single-bundle and double-bundle techniques. Arthroscopy 23(6):618–628PubMedCrossRef

29.

Muneta T, Koga H, Morito T, Yagishita K, Sekiya I (2006) A retrospective study of the midterm outcome of two-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction using quadrupled semitendinosus tendon in comparison with one-bundle reconstruction. Arthroscopy 22(3):252–258PubMedCrossRef

30.

Musahl V, Plakseychuk A, VanScyoc A, Sasaki T, Debski RE, McMahon PJ, Fu FH (2005) Varying femoral tunnels between the anatomical footprint and isometric positions: effect on kinematics of the anterior cruciate ligament-reconstructed knee. Am J Sports Med 33(5):712–718PubMedCrossRef

31.

Nohmi S, Ishibashi Y, Tsuda E, Yamamoto Y, Tsukada H, Toh S (2012) Biomechanical comparison between single-bundle and double-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction with hamstring tendon under cyclic loading condition. Sports Med Arthrosc Rehabil Ther Technol 4(1):23PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef

32.

Noyes FR, Grood ES, Cummings JF, Wroble RR (1991) An analysis of the pivot shift phenomenon. The knee motions and subluxations induced by different examiners. Am J Sports Med 19(2):148–155PubMedCrossRef

33.

Pinczewski LA, Salmon LJ, Jackson WF, von Bormann RB, Haslam PG, Tashiro S (2008) Radiological landmarks for placement of the tunnels in single-bundle reconstruction of the anterior cruciate ligament. J Bone Joint Surg 90(2):172–179CrossRef

34.

Plaweski S, Grimaldi M, Courvoisier A, Wimsey S (2011) Intraoperative comparisons of knee kinematics of double-bundle versus single-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 19(8):1277–1286PubMedCrossRef

35.

Rahr-Wagner L, Thillemann TM, Pedersen AB, Lind MC (2013) Increased risk of revision after anteromedial compared with transtibial drilling of the femoral tunnel during primary anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: results from the Danish Knee Ligament Reconstruction Register. Arthroscopy 29(1):98–105PubMedCrossRef

36.

Samuelsson K, Desai N, McNair E, van Eck CF, Petzold M, Fu FH, Bhandari M, Karlsson J (2012) Level of evidence in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction research: a systematic review. Am J Sports Med 41(4):924–934PubMedCrossRef

37.

Schindler OS (2012) Surgery for anterior cruciate ligament deficiency: a historical perspective. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 20(1):5–47PubMedCrossRef

38.

Siebold R, Dehler C, Ellert T (2008) Prospective randomized comparison of double-bundle versus single-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Arthroscopy 24(2):137–145PubMedCrossRef

39.

Snyder-Mackler L, Fitzgerald GK, Bartolozzi AR 3rd, Ciccotti MG (1997) The relationship between passive joint laxity and functional outcome after anterior cruciate ligament injury. Am J Sports Med 25(2):191–195PubMedCrossRef

40.

Suomalainen P, Jarvela T, Paakkala A, Kannus P, Jarvinen M (2012) Double-bundle versus single-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a prospective randomized study with 5-year results. Am J Sports Med 40(7):1511–1518PubMedCrossRef

41.

Tiamklang T, Sumanont S, Foocharoen T, Laopaiboon M (2012) Double-bundle versus single-bundle reconstruction for anterior cruciate ligament rupture in adults. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 11: CD008413

42.

van Eck CF, Kopf S, Irrgang JJ, Blankevoort L, Bhandari M, Fu FH, Poolman RW (2012) Single-bundle versus double-bundle reconstruction for anterior cruciate ligament rupture: a meta-analysis-does anatomy matter? Arthroscopy 28(3):405–424PubMedCrossRef

43.

Yagi M, Kuroda R, Nagamune K, Yoshiya S, Kurosaka M (2007) Double-bundle ACL reconstruction can improve rotational stability. Clin Orthop Rel Res 454:100–107CrossRef

44.

Yagi M, Wong EK, Kanamori A, Debski RE, Fu FH, Woo SL (2002) Biomechanical analysis of an anatomic anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Am J Sports Med 30(5):660–666PubMed

45.

Yasuda K, Kondo E, Ichiyama H, Tanabe Y, Tohyama H (2006) Clinical evaluation of anatomic double-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction procedure using hamstring tendon grafts: comparisons among 3 different procedures. Arthroscopy 22(3):240–251PubMedCrossRef

46.

Zavras TD, Race A, Bull AM, Amis AA (2001) A comparative study of ‘isometric’ points for anterior cruciate ligament graft attachment. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 9(1):28–33PubMedCrossRef

47.

Zhu Y, Tang RK, Zhao P, Zhu SS, Li YG, Li JB (2012) Double-bundle reconstruction results in superior clinical outcome than single-bundle reconstruction. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 21(5):1085–1096PubMedCrossRef

Title: Anatomic single- versus double-bundle ACL reconstruction: a meta-analysis
Authors: Neel Desai
Haukur Björnsson
Volker Musahl
Mohit Bhandari
Max Petzold
Freddie H. Fu
Kristian Samuelsson
Publication date: 01-05-2014
Publisher: Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Published in: Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy / Issue 5/2014
Print ISSN: 0942-2056
Electronic ISSN: 1433-7347
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00167-013-2811-6

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on sleep in brain health

Springer Medicine

Anatomic single- versus double-bundle ACL reconstruction: a meta-analysis

Abstract

Purpose

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Level of evidence

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on sleep in brain health

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Purpose

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Level of evidence

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 5/2014

Anterior cruciate ligament regeneration using mesenchymal stem cells and collagen type I scaffold in a rabbit model

Sensitivity and specificity of bell-hammer tear as an indirect sign of partial anterior cruciate ligament rupture on magnetic resonance imaging

Knee morphology and risk factors for developing an anterior cruciate ligament rupture: an MRI comparison between ACL-ruptured and non-injured knees

Revision of anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction with allografts in patients younger than 40 years old: a 2 to 4 year results

Effect of suturing the femoral portion of a four-strand graft during an ACL reconstruction

Brace or no-brace after ACL graft? Four-year results of a prospective clinical trial