Different Strategies in Making Transseptal Portal for the Different Purposes

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.