Dynamic Three-Dimensional Computed Tomography Mapping of Isometric Posterior Cruciate Ligament Attachment Sites on the Tibia and Femur: Single- Versus Double-Bundle Analysis


      (1) To determine the area of posterior cruciate ligament (PCL) insertion sites on the lateral wall of the medial femoral condyle (LWMFC) that demonstrates the least amount of length change through full range of motion (ROM) and (2) to identify a range of flexion that would be favorable for graft tensioning for single-bundle (SB) and double-bundle (DB) PCL reconstruction.


      Six fresh-frozen cadaveric knees were obtained. Three-dimensional computed tomography point-cloud models were obtained from 0° to 135°. A point grid was placed on the LWMFC and the tibial PCL facet. Intra-articular length was calculated for each point on the femur to the tibia at all flexion angles and grouped to represent areas for bone tunnels of SB and DB PCLR. Normalized length changes were evaluated.


      Femoral tunnel location and angle of graft fixation were significant contributors to mean, minimum, and maximum normalized length of the PCL (all p < .001). Tibial tunnel location was not significant in any case (all p < .22). A femoral tunnel in the location of the posteromedial bundle of the PCL resulted in the least length change at all tibial positions (maximum change 13%). Fixation of the anterolateral bundle in extension or at 30° flexion resulted in significant overconstraint of the PCL graft. The femoral tunnel location for a SB PCLR resulted in significant laxity at lower ranges of flexion.


      PCL length was significantly dependent on femoral tunnel position and angle of fixation, whereas tibial tunnel position did not significantly contribute to observed differences. All PCL grafts demonstrated anisometry, with the anterolateral bundle being more anisometric than the posteromedial bundle. For DB PCLR, the posteromedial bundle demonstrated the highest degree of isometry throughout ROM, although no area of the LWMFC was truly isometric. The anterolateral bundle should be fixed at 90° to avoid overconstraint, and SB PCLR demonstrated significant laxity at lower ranges of flexion.

      Clinical Relevance

      Surgeons can apply the results of this investigation to surgical planning in PCLR to optimize isometry, which may ultimately reduce graft strain and the risk of graft failure. Additionally, DB PCLR demonstrated superiority compared with SB PCLR regarding graft isometry, as significant laxity was encountered at lower ranges of flexion in SB PCLRs. Fixation of the ALB at 90° flexion should be performed to avoid overconstraint in knee extension.
      To read this article in full you will need to make a payment

      Purchase one-time access:

      Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online access
      One-time access price info
      • For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
      • For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'


      Subscribe to Arthroscopy
      Already a print subscriber? Claim online access
      Already an online subscriber? Sign in
      Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect


        • LaPrade C.M.
        • Civitarese D.M.
        • Rasmussen M.T.
        • LaPrade R.F.
        Emerging updates on the posterior cruciate ligament: A review of the current literature.
        Am J Sports Med. 2015; 43: 3077-3092
        • Kennedy N.I.
        • LaPrade R.F.
        • Goldsmith M.T.
        • et al.
        Posterior cruciate ligament graft fixation angles, part 1: Biomechanical evaluation for anatomic single-bundle reconstruction.
        Am J Sports Med. 2014; 42: 2338-2345
        • Gwinner C.
        • Jung T.M.
        • Schatka I.
        • Weiler A.
        Posterior laxity increases over time after PCL reconstruction.
        Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2019; 27: 389-396
        • Chahla J.
        • Nitri M.
        • Civitarese D.
        • Dean C.S.
        • Moulton S.G.
        • LaPrade R.F.
        Anatomic double-bundle posterior cruciate ligament reconstruction.
        Arthrosc Tech. 2016; 5: e149-e156
        • Pierce C.M.
        • O’Brien L.
        • Griffin L.W.
        • Laprade R.F.
        Posterior cruciate ligament tears: Functional and postoperative rehabilitation.
        Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2013; 21: 1071-1084
        • Chahla J.
        • Moatshe G.
        • Cinque M.
        • et al.
        Single bundle and double bundle posterior cruciate ligament reconstructions: A systematic review and meta-analysis of 441 patients at a minimum 2 years follow up arthroscopy.
        . 2017; 33: 2066-2080
        • Chernchujit B.
        • Samart S.
        • Na Nakorn P.
        Remnant-preserving posterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: Arthroscopic transseptal, rod and pulley technique.
        Arthrosc Tech. 2017; 6: e15-e20
        • Chahla J.
        • von Bormann R.
        • Engebretsen L.
        • LaPrade R.F.
        Anatomic posterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: State of the art.
        J ISAKOS. 2016; 1: 292-302
        • Forsythe B.
        • Agarwalla A.
        • Lansdown D.A.
        • et al.
        Proximal fixation anterior to the lateral femoral epicondyle optimizes isometry in anterolateral ligament reconstruction.
        Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2019; 27: 875-884
        • Forsythe B.
        • Lansdown D.
        • Zuke W.A.
        • et al.
        Dynamic 3-dimensional mapping of isometric anterior cruciate ligament attachment sites on the tibia and femur: Is anatomic also isometric?.
        Arthroscopy. 2018; 34: 2466-2475
        • Forsythe B.
        • Collins M.J.
        • Arns T.A.
        • et al.
        Optimization of anteromedial portal femoral tunnel drilling with flexible and straight reamers in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: A cadaveric 3-dimensional computed tomography analysis.
        Arthroscopy. 2017; 33: 1036-1043
        • Anderson C.J.
        • Ziegler C.G.
        • Wijdicks C.A.
        • Engebretsen L.
        • LaPrade R.F.
        Arthroscopically pertinent anatomy of the anterolateral and posteromedial bundles of the posterior cruciate ligament.
        J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2012; 94: 1936-1945
        • Forsythe B.
        • Harner C.
        • Martins C.A.
        • Shen W.
        • Lopes Jr., O.V.
        • Fu F.H.
        Topography of the femoral attachment of the posterior cruciate ligament. Surgical technique.
        J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2009; 91: 89-100
        • Burns 2nd, W.C.
        • Draganich L.F.
        • Pyevich M.
        • Reider B.
        The effect of femoral tunnel position and graft tensioning technique on posterior laxity of the posterior cruciate ligament-reconstructed knee.
        Am J Sports Med. 1995; 23: 424-430
        • de Queiroz A.A.
        • Janoversusky C.
        • da Silveira Franciozi C.E.
        • et al.
        Posterior cruciate ligament reconstruction by means of tibial tunnel: Anatomical study on cadavers for tunnel positioning.
        Rev Bras Ortop. 2014; 49: 370-373
        • Osti M.
        • Krawinkel A.
        • Benedetto K.P.
        In vivo evaluation of femoral and tibial graft tunnel placement following all-inside arthroscopic tibial inlay reconstruction of the posterior cruciate ligament.
        Knee. 2014; 21: 1198-1202
        • Teng Y.
        • Zhang X.
        • Ma C.
        • et al.
        Evaluation of the permissible maximum angle of the tibial tunnel in transtibial anatomic posterior cruciate ligament reconstruction by computed tomography.
        Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 2019; 139: 547-552
        • Kantaras A.T.
        • Johnson D.L.
        The medial meniscal root as a landmark for tibial tunnel position in posterior cruciate ligament reconstruction.
        Arthroscopy. 2002; 18: 99-101
        • Markolf K.L.
        • McAllister D.R.
        • Young C.R.
        • McWilliams J.
        • Oakes D.A.
        Biomechanical effects of medial-lateral tibial tunnel placement in posterior cruciate ligament reconstruction.
        J Orthop Res. 2003; 21: 177-182
        • Kernkamp W.A.
        • Jens A.J.T.
        • Varady N.H.
        • et al.
        Anatomic is better than isometric posterior cruciate ligament tunnel placement based upon in vivo simulation.
        Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2018; 27: 2440-2449
        • Wright J.O.
        • Skelley N.W.
        • Schur R.P.
        • Castile R.M.
        • Lake S.P.
        • Brophy R.H.
        Microstructural and mechanical properties of the posterior cruciate ligament: A comparison of the anterolateral and posteromedial bundles.
        J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2016; 98: 1656-1664
        • Ahn J.H.
        • Lee S.H.
        Anatomic graft passage in remnant-preserving posterior cruciate ligament reconstruction.
        Arthrosc Tech. 2014; 3: e579-e582
        • Chen T.
        • Liu S.
        • Chen J.
        All-anterior approach for arthroscopic posterior cruciate ligament reconstruction with remnant preservation.
        Arthrosc Tech. 2016; 5: e1203-e1207
        • Song J.
        • Kim H.
        • Han J.
        • et al.
        Clinical outcome of posterior cruciate ligament reconstruction with and without remnant preservation.
        Arthrosc Tech. 2015; 31: 1796-1806
        • Kennedy N.I.
        • LaPrade R.F.
        • Goldsmith M.T.
        • et al.
        Posterior cruciate ligament graft fixation angles, part 2: Biomechanical evaluation for anatomic double-bundle reconstruction.
        Am J Sports Med. 2014; 42: 2346-2355
        • LaPrade R.F.
        • Cinque M.E.
        • Dornan G.J.
        • et al.
        Double-bundle posterior cruciate ligament reconstruction in 100 patients at a mean 3 years’ follow-up: Outcomes were comparable to anterior cruciate ligament reconstructions.
        Am J Sports Med. 2018; 46: 1809-1818
        • Li Y.
        • Li J.
        • Wang J.
        • Gao S.
        • Zhang Y.
        Comparison of single-bundle and double-bundle isolated posterior cruciate ligament reconstruction with allograft: A prospective, randomized study.
        Arthroscopy. 2014; 30: 695-700
        • Lee D.-Y.
        • Park Y.-J.
        Single-bundle versus double-bundle posterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.
        Knee Surg Rel Res. 2017; 29: 246-255
        • Tucker C.J.
        • Joyner P.W.
        • Endres N.K.
        Single versus double-bundle PCL reconstruction: Scientific rationale and clinical evidence.
        Curr Rev Musculoskelet Med. 2018; 11: 285-289
        • Yoon K.H.
        • Kim E.J.
        • Kwon Y.B.
        • Kim S.G.
        Minimum 10-year results of single- versus double-bundle posterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: Clinical, radiologic, and survivorship outcomes.
        Am J Sports Med. 2019; 47: 822-827
        • Fanelli G.C.
        • Beck J.D.
        • Edson C.J.
        Single compared to double-bundle PCL reconstruction using allograft tissue.
        J Knee Surg. 2012; 25: 59-64