title: Is the all-arthroscopic tibial inlay double-bundle PCL reconstruction a viable option in multiligament knee injuries?
abstract: BACKGROUND
  All-arthroscopic tibial inlay double-bundle (DB) posterior cruciate ligament (PCL) reconstruction avoids an open dissection and the "killer turn" while maintaining the advantage of an anatomic graft. However, clinical data on the viability of this surgical technique in multiligamentous knee injuries are lacking.
  
  
  OBJECTIVE
  At greater than 2 years of followup, we evaluated (1) validated outcomes scores; (2) range of motion; and (3) side-to-side stability on PCL stress radiographs of a small group of patients who underwent all-arthroscopic tibial inlay DB PCL reconstruction in multiligamentous knee injuries, either shortly after injury or late.
  
  
  METHODS
  All patients sustaining an operative multiligamentous knee injury between August 2007 and March 2009 underwent PCL reconstruction with the all-arthroscopic tibial inlay DB PCL reconstruction. Twelve patients sustained such injuries and were reconstructed during the study period and all 12 returned for followup with a minimum of 2 years (mean 3 ± 0.8 years). There were nine males and three females, with a mean age of 30 years; four patients had a subacute reconstruction (≥ 3 weeks, but < 3 months), and eight patients had chronic reconstructions (> 3 months). Mean time from injury to PCL reconstruction was 7 ± 12 months. Demographics, ROM, outcome scores (Lysholm and International Knee Documentation Committee [IKDC] scores), and PCL stress views were obtained.
  
  
  RESULTS
  At final followup, mean Lysholm and IKDC subjective scores were 79 ± 16 and 72 ± 19, respectively. IKDC objective scores included eight nearly normal knees, three abnormal knees, and one severely abnormal knee. Mean flexion and extension losses compared with the contralateral were 10 ± 9 and 1 ± 2, respectively. Mean ± SD final side-to-side difference on PCL stress radiographs was 5 ± 3 mm.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  The clinical and radiographic results of the all-arthroscopic tibial inlay DB PCL reconstruction appear comparable to the same technique in isolated PCL injuries and, based on similar published case series, comparable to results of multiligamentous knee reconstructions using other PCL reconstruction techniques.
  
  
  METHODS
  Level IV, therapeutic study. See the Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.
authors.affiliation: Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, University of Michigan, 24 Frank Lloyd Wright Drive, Lobby A, Ann Arbor, MI, 48106, USA.
authors.forename: Alexander E
authors.initials: AE
authors.lastname: Weber
authors.forename: Benjamin
authors.initials: B
authors.lastname: Bissell
authors.forename: Edward M
authors.initials: EM
authors.lastname: Wojtys
authors.forename: Jon K
authors.initials: JK
authors.lastname: Sekiya
mesh_terms: D000293:Adolescent; D000328:Adult; D000368:Aged; D016118:Anterior Cruciate Ligament / Q000601:surgery; D000070598:Anterior Cruciate Ligament Injuries; D001182:Arthroscopy / Q000379:methods*; D064592:Autografts; D005260:Female; D005500:Follow-Up Studies; D006801:Humans; D007718:Knee Injuries / Q000175:diagnosis / Q000503:physiopathology / Q000601:surgery*; D007719:Knee Joint; D008297:Male; D017888:Medial Collateral Ligament, Knee / Q000293:injuries / Q000601:surgery; D008875:Middle Aged; D016119:Posterior Cruciate Ligament / Q000293:injuries / Q000601:surgery*; D016059:Range of Motion, Articular; D019651:Plastic Surgery Procedures / Q000379:methods*; D012189:Retrospective Studies; D012421:Rupture; D013710:Tendons / Q000637:transplantation*; D013977:Tibia / Q000601:surgery*; D013997:Time Factors; D016896:Treatment Outcome; D055815:Young Adult