Functional outcomes in patients with chronic isolated posterior cruciate ligament injuries treated surgically using the modified Inlay tibial fixation technique: case series
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.58814/01208845.655Keywords:
Posterior Cruciate Ligament, Posterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction, Functional StatusAbstract
Introduction: Isolated posterior cruciate ligament (PCL) injuries are uncommon. Symptomatic grade III injuries often require surgical treatment; however, there is no consensus regarding the optimal surgical technique.
Objective: To describe patient-reported functional outcomes in individuals with chronic isolated grade III PCL injuries treated with reconstruction using the modified Inlay tibial fixation technique at Hospital Militar Central, Bogotá D.C., Colombia.
Methodology: A retrospective case series including 21 military patients with chronic isolated PCL injuries who underwent surgical reconstruction between 2013 and 2023 at a referral center. Sociodemographic and clinical data were collected through a review of medical records. The Spanish-validated Lysholm and Tegner scales, as well as the visual analog scale (VAS) for pain, were administered. Descriptive statistical analyses and nonparametric tests were performed according to the nature of the variables.
Results: The mean age was 34.2 ± 5.7 years, and the median time from injury to surgery was 36 months. The mean Lysholm score was 87.8, the mean Tegner score was 5.2, and the median VAS score was 3. Overall, 66.6% of patients achieved excellent or good outcomes according to the Lysholm classification. No perioperative complications were recorded. A significant negative correlation was observed between VAS and Lysholm scores (rho=-0.802; p=0.001). Exploratory association were also evaluated between the functional outcome scores and the time from injury to surgery (Lysholm: rho=0.076; Tegner: rho=0.234).
Conclusion: The modified Inlay tibial fixation technique demonstrated favorable patient-reported functional outcomes in military patients with chronic isolated PCL injuries.
Downloads
References
1. Sanders TL, Pareek A, Barrett IJ, Kremers HM, Bryan AJ, Stuart MJ, et al. Incidence and long-term follow-up of isolated posterior cruciate ligament tears. Knee Surg, Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2017;25(10):3017-23. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00167-016-4052-y PMID: 26922055.
2. Brand J, Weiler A, Caborn DN, Brown CH Jr, Johnson DL. Graft fixation in cruciate ligament reconstruction. Am J of Sports Med. 2000;28(5):761-74. https://doi.org/10.1177/03635465000280052501 PMID: 11032238.
3. Schreier FJ, Banovetz MT, Rodriguez AN, LaPrade RF. Cutting-Edge Posterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction Principles. Arch Bone Jt Surg. 2021;9(6):607-17. https://doi.org/10.22038/ABJS.2021.59467.2946 PMID: 35106325; PMCID: PMC8765199.
4. Markolf KL, Feeley BT, Tejwani SG, Martin DE, McAllister DR. Changes in knee laxity and ligament force after sectioning the posteromedial bundle of the posterior cruciate ligament. Arthroscopy. 2006;22(10):1100-6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arthro.2006.05.018 PMID: 17027408.
5. Johnson D. Posterior cruciate ligament: A literature review. Curr Orthop Pract. 2010;21(1):27-31.
6. Knapik DM, Gopinatth V, Jackson GR, Chahla J, Smith MV, Matava MJ, Brophy RH. Global variation in isolated posterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. J Exp Orthop. 2022;9(1):104. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40634-022-00541-4 PMID: 36209443; PMCID: PMC9548455.
7. Lee DY, Kim DH, Kim HJ, Ahn HS, Lee TH, Hwang SC. Posterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction With Transtibial or Tibial Inlay Techniques: A Meta-analysis of Biomechanical and Clinical Outcomes. Am J of Sports Med. 2018;46(11):2789-97. https://doi.org/10.1177/0363546517725070 PMID: 29328888.
8. Shelbourne KD, Muthukaruppan Y. Subjective results of nonoperatively treated, acute, isolated posterior cruciate ligament injuries. Arthroscopy. 2005;21(4):457-61. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arthro.2004.11.013 PMID: 15800527.
9. Shelbourne KD, O’Shea JJ. Natural history of nonoperatively treated posterior cruciate ligament injuries. Sports Med Arthrosc Rev. 1999;7(4):235-42.
10. Vasdev A, Rajgopal A, Gupta H, Dahiya V, Tyagi VC. Arthroscopic All-Inside Posterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: Overcoming the “Killer Turn.” Arthrosc Tech. 2016;5(3):e501. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eats.2016.01.033 PMID: 27656369; PMCID: PMC5021088.
11. Jakob RP, Rüegsegger M. Therapie der posterioren und posterolateralen Knieinstabilität [Therapy of posterior and posterolateral knee instability]. Orthopade. 1993;22(6):405-13. German. PMID: 8309701.
12. Berg EE. Posterior cruciate ligament tibial inlay reconstruction. Arthroscopy. 1995;11(1):69-76. https:/doi.org/10.1016/0749-8063(95)90091-8 PMID: 7727015.
13. Vellios EE, Jones KJ, McAllister DR. Open Tibial Inlay PCL Reconstruction: Surgical Technique and Clinical Outcomes. Curr Rev Musculoskelet Med. 2018;11(2):316-9. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12178-018-9490-3 PMCID: PMC5970125.
14. Papalia R, Osti L, Del Buono A, Denaro V, Maffulli N. Tibial inlay for posterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a systematic review. Knee. 2010;17(4):264-9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.knee.2010.02.006 PMID: 20226678.
15. Moorman CT 3rd, Murphy Zane MS, Bansai S, Cina SJ, Wickiewicz TL, Warren RF, et al. Tibial Insertion of the Posterior Cruciate Ligament: a sagittal plane analysis using gross, histologic, and radiographic methods. Arthroscopy. 2008;24(3):269-75. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arthro.2007.08.032 PMID: 18308177.
16. Pache S, Aman ZS, Kennedy M, Nakama GY, Moatshe G, Ziegler C, LaPrade RF. Posterior Cruciate Ligament: Current Concepts Review. Arch Bone Jt Surg. 2018;6(1):8-18. PMID: 29430489; PMCID: PMC5799606.
17. Race A, Amis AA. PCL reconstruction. In vitro biomechanical comparison of “isometric” versus single and double-bundled “anatomic” grafts. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1998;80(1):173-9. https://doi.org/10.1302/0301-620c.80b1.7453 PMID: 9460977.
18. Niedzwietzki P, Zantop T, Weimann A, Herbort M, Raschke MJ, Petersen W. Femoral fixation of hamstring grafts in posterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: biomechanical evaluation of different fixation techniques: is there an acute angle effect? Am J of Sports Med. 2007;35(5):780-6. https://doi.org/10.1177/0363546506297906 PMID: 17307890.
19. Bergfeld JA, McAllister DR, Parker RD, Valdevit AD, Kambic HE. A biomechanical comparison of posterior cruciate ligament reconstruction techniques. Am J Sports Med. 2001;29(2):129-36. https://doi.org/10.1177/03635465010290020401 PMID: 11292036.
20. Afanador Acuña EW, Sánchez Villa FJ, Sánchez Cruz D, Ibáñez Pinilla M. Resultados funcionales de pacientes con reconstrucción crónica de lesiones aisladas y combinadas del ligamento cruzado posterior. Rev. colomb. ortop. traumatol. 2016;30(2):67-76. https:/doi.org/10.1016/j.rccot.2016.07.006
21. Hammoud S, Reinhardt KR, Marx RG. Outcomes of posterior cruciate ligament treatment: a review of the evidence. Sports Med Arthrosc Rev. 2010;18(4):280-91. https://doi.org/10.1097/JSA.0b013e3181eaf8b4 PMID: 21079509.
22. Voos JE, Mauro CS, Wente T, Warren RF, Wickiewicz TL. Posterior cruciate ligament: anatomy, biomechanics, and outcomes. Am J Sports Med. 2012;40(1):222-31. https://doi.org/10.1177/0363546511416316 PMID: 21803977.
23. Jackman T, LaPrade RF, Pontinen T, Lender PA. Intraobserver and interobserver reliability of the kneeling technique of stress radiography for the evaluation of posterior knee laxity. Am J Sports Med. 2008;36(8):1571-6. https://doi.org/10.1177/0363546508315897 PMID: 18448580.
24. Gwinner C, Jung TM, Schatka I, Weiler A. Posterior laxity increases over time after PCL reconstruction. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2019;27(2):389-96. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00167-018-5035-y PMID: 29968188.
25. World Medical Association. World Medical Association Declaration of Helsinki: Ethical Principles for Medical Research Involving Human Participants. JAMA. 2025;333(1):71-4. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2024.21972 PMID: 39425955.
26. Ministerio de Salud de Colombia. Resolución 8430 de 1993: Por la cual se establecen las normas científicas, técnicas y administrativas para la investigación en salud. Bogotá D.C.: Ministerio de Salud; 1993.
27. Lysholm J, Gillquist J. Evaluation of knee ligament surgery results with special emphasis on use of a scoring scale. Am J Sports Med. 1982;10(3):150-4. https://doi.org/10.1177/036354658201000306 PMID: 6896798.
28. Tegner Y, Lysholm J. Rating systems in the evaluation of knee ligament injuries. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1985;(198):43-9. PMID: 4028566.
29. Shin YS, Kim HJ, Lee DH. No Clinically Important Difference in Knee Scores or Instability Between Transtibial and Inlay Techniques for PCL Reconstruction: A Systematic Review. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2017;475(4):1239-48. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11999-016-5176-6 PMID: 27896678; PMCID: PMC5339144.
30. Song EK, Park HW, Ahn YS, Seon JK. Transtibial versus tibial inlay techniques for posterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: Long-term follow-up study. Am J Sports Med. 2014;42(12):2964-71. https://doi.org/10.1177/0363546514550982 PMID: 25288624.
31. MacGillivray JD, Stein BES, Park M, Allen AA, Wickiewicz TL, Warren RF. Comparison of tibial inlay versus transtibial techniques for isolated posterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: minimum 2-year follow-up. Arthroscopy. 2006;22(3):320-8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arthro.2005.08.057 PMID: 16517317.
32. Tucker CJ, Cotter EJ, Waterman BR, Kilcoyne KG, Cameron KL, Owens BD. Functional Outcomes After Isolated and Combined Posterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction in a Military Population. Orthop J Sports Med. 2019;7(10):2325967119875139. https://doi.org/10.1177/2325967119875139 PMID: 31656823; PMCID: PMC6791041.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 The Author(s).
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
| Article metrics | |
|---|---|
| Abstract views | |
| Galley vies | |
| PDF Views | |
| HTML views | |
| Other views | |
