Double-Bundle Medial Collateral Ligament Reconstruction Improves Anteromedial Rotatory Instability
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: New techniques have been proposed to better address anteromedial rotatory instability in a medial collateral ligament (MCL)–injured knee that require an extra graft and more surgical implants, which might not be feasible in every clinical setting. Purpose: To investigate if improved resistance to anteromedial rotatory instability can be achieved by using a single-graft, double-bundle (DB) MCL reconstruction with a proximal fixation more anteriorly on the tibia, in comparison with the gold standard single-bundle (SB) MCL reconstruction. Study Design: Controlled laboratory study. Methods: Eight fresh-frozen human cadaveric knees were tested using a 6 degrees of freedom robotic simulator in intact knee, superficial MCL/deep MCL–deficient, and reconstruction states. Three different reconstructions were tested: DB MCL no proximal tibial fixation and DB and SB MCL reconstruction with proximal tibial fixation. Knee kinematics were recorded at 0°, 30°, 60°, and 90° of knee flexion for the following measurements: 8 N·m of valgus rotation (VR), 5 N·m of external tibial rotation, 5 N·m of internal tibial rotation, combined 89 N of anterior tibial translation and 5 N·m of external rotation for anteromedial rotation (AMR) and anteromedial translation (AMT). The differences between each state for every measurement were analyzed with VR and AMR/AMT as primary outcomes. Results: Cutting the superficial MCL/deep MCL increased VR and AMR/AMT in all knee positions except at 90° for VR ( P < .05). All reconstructions restored VR to the intact state except at 90° of knee flexion ( P < .05). The DB MCL no proximal tibial fixation reconstruction could not restore intact AMR/AMT kinematics in any knee position ( P < .05). Adding an anterior-based proximal tibial fixation restored intact AMR/AMT kinematics at ≥30° of knee flexion except at 90° for AMT ( P < .05). The SB MCL reconstruction could not restore intact AMR/AMT kinematics at 0° and 90° of knee flexion ( P < .05). Conclusion: In this in vitro cadaveric study, a DB MCL reconstruction with anteriorly placed proximal tibial fixation was able to control AMR and AMT better than the gold standard SB MCL reconstruction. Clinical Relevance: In patients with anteromedial rotatory instability and valgus instability, a DB MCL reconstruction may be superior to the SB MCL reconstruction, without causing extra surgical morbidity or additional costs.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".