Anterior cruciate ligament tibial guide pin accuracy and surgical precision: comparing 3.0-mm and 2.4-mm guide pins.

PURPOSE The purpose of this study was to evaluate the accuracy of a 3.0-mm-diameter anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) tibial guide pin versus a standard, 2.4-mm drill-tipped guide pin. A secondary purpose was to evaluate surgeon precision in identifying the true (anatomic) center of the ACL tibial footprint using arthroscopic visualization. METHODS Five matched pairs of cadaveric knees were disarticulated, leaving a well-defined footprint of the ACL on the tibial plateau. The tibial footprint was digitally recorded by a bioengineer, and the true center of the footprint was calculated. Next, using arthroscopic visualization, a surgeon identified and marked his estimation of the true center of the ACL tibial footprint. This mark was then digitally recorded by the bioengineer and compared with the calculated center, allowing quantification of surgeon anatomic precision. Finally, under arthroscopic visualization, the surgeon was given 1 attempt to aim and drill the guide pin to his mark. Pin position was digitally recorded; the distance of the drill pin from the mark quantifies drill pin placement accuracy. RESULTS Mean accuracy for the 3.0-mm guide pin was 2.87 +/- 1.19 mm versus 6.98 +/- 1.29 mm for the 2.4-mm pin. The difference was significant (P = .005). Surgeon anatomic precision was 3.32 +/- 2.10 mm. CONCLUSIONS Our results show that a 3-mm ACL tibial guide pin is significantly more accurate than a 2.4-mm-diameter pin. The 3-mm pin accuracy is within the range of surgeon precision; the 2.4-mm pin accuracy is not. CLINICAL RELEVANCE Pin accuracy and surgeon precision are clinically relevant measures because anatomic tunnel placement is a determinant of ACL reconstruction outcome.

[1]  T. Zantop,et al.  Anatomy of the anterior cruciate ligament with regard to its two bundles. , 2007, Clinical orthopaedics and related research.

[2]  Freddie H Fu,et al.  Accuracy of anterior cruciate ligament tunnel placement with an active robotic system: a cadaveric study. , 2002, Arthroscopy : the journal of arthroscopic & related surgery : official publication of the Arthroscopy Association of North America and the International Arthroscopy Association.

[3]  S. Metz,et al.  Tibial insertions of the anteromedial and posterolateral bundles of the anterior cruciate ligament: morphometry, arthroscopic landmarks, and orientation model for bone tunnel placement. , 2008, Arthroscopy : the journal of arthroscopic & related surgery : official publication of the Arthroscopy Association of North America and the International Arthroscopy Association.

[4]  D. W. Jackson,et al.  Tibial tunnel placement in ACL reconstruction. , 1994, Arthroscopy : the journal of arthroscopic & related surgery : official publication of the Arthroscopy Association of North America and the International Arthroscopy Association.

[5]  S. Howell,et al.  Principles for placing the tibial tunnel and avoiding roof impingement during reconstruction of a torn anterior cruciate ligament , 1998, Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy.

[6]  M. Fineberg,et al.  Practical considerations in anterior cruciate ligament replacement surgery. , 2000, Arthroscopy : the journal of arthroscopic & related surgery : official publication of the Arthroscopy Association of North America and the International Arthroscopy Association.

[7]  T. Sudhahar,et al.  Comparison of expected vs. actual tunnel position in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. , 2004, The Knee.

[8]  G. Apic,et al.  Differences in the Placement of the Tibial Tunnel during Reconstruction of the Anterior Cruciate Ligament with and without Computer-Assisted Navigation , 2007, The American journal of sports medicine.