• Jorge Chahla, Gilbert Moatshe, Mark E Cinque, Grant J Dornan, Justin J Mitchell, Taylor J Ridley, and Robert F LaPrade.
• Steadman Philippon Research Institute, Vail, Colorado, U.S.A.
• Arthroscopy. 2017 Nov 1; 33 (11): 2066-2080.

PurposeTo perform a systematic review on the techniques and a meta-analysis on the functional and objective outcomes after single-bundle (SB) versus double-bundle (DB) posterior cruciate ligament (PCL) reconstructions.MethodsA systematic review of the techniques, as well as functional and objective outcomes of clinical studies comparing SB versus DB PCL reconstruction with a mean follow-up of at least 24 months and minimum level of evidence of III were performed. After review of the literature, a quality analysis of the studies (Detsky score) and a meta-analysis comparing raw mean differences in data between SB and DB PCL groups were performed. Clinical outcome measures included in the meta-analysis were functional outcomes (Lysholm, Tegner, and objective International Knee Documentation Committee [IKDC] scores) and objective measurements (arthrometer and stress radiographs).ResultsThe systematic search identified 11 studies (441 patients). Three studies were prospective randomized controlled trials and the other 8 studies were case-control studies. Two hundred thirty-two patients were treated with SB PCL reconstruction, whereas 209 were treated with DB PCL reconstruction. Only 4 studies satisfied the threshold for a satisfactory level of methodologic quality (>75%). There were no significant differences between SB and DB PCL reconstructions in postoperative Lysholm (P = .6, 95% confidence interval [CI], -0.98, 2.18) or Tegner scores (P = .37, 95% CI, -0.19, 0.92). DB PCL reconstruction provided significantly better objective posterior tibial translation stability than the SB technique using the Telos technique at 90° (P = -.58, 95% CI, -1.06, -0.10).ConclusionsImproved patient-reported outcomes and knee stability were achieved with both SB and DB PCL reconstruction surgery. DB PCL reconstruction provided significantly improved objective posterior tibial stability and objective IKDC scores when compared with SB PCL reconstruction in randomized clinical trials. No significant difference was found for the other patient-reported outcomes.Level Of EvidenceLevel III, systematic review and meta-analysis of Level II and III studies.Copyright © 2017 Arthroscopy Association of North America. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

16 keywords...

hide…