Anatomic Posterolateral Corner Reconstruction
Anatomic Posterolateral Corner Reconstruction
Anatomic Posterolateral Corner Reconstruction
Abstract: Posterolateral corner injuries represent a complex injury pattern, with damage to important coronal and
rotatory stabilizers of the knee. These lesions commonly occur in association with other ligament injuries, making de-
cisions regarding treatment challenging. Grade III posterolateral corner injuries result in significant instability and have
poor outcomes when treated nonoperatively. As a result, reconstruction is advocated. A thorough knowledge of the
anatomy is essential for surgical treatment of this pathology. The following technical note provides a diagnostic approach,
postoperative management, and details of a technique for anatomic reconstruction of the 3 main static stabilizers of the
posterolateral corner of the knee.
Fig 1. (A) Varus stress x-ray of a right knee being performed on a patient with suspected posterolateral corner injury. (B)
Comparative plain bilateral x-ray images demonstrating a side-to-side difference of 4.1 mm, which indicates a complete
posterolateral corner injury on the right knee.
ANATOMIC POSTEROLATERAL CORNER RECONSTRUCTION e3
site (Fig 6A). Using a collateral ligament reconstruction dissection is begun anteriorly and carried posteriorly
aiming sleeve (Arthrex), a guide pin is drilled over the away from the cartilage of the femoral condyle. A guide
FCL attachment site (Fig 6B) and should exit the medial pin is then inserted at this location, parallel to the FCL
aspect of the distal thigh, about 5 cm proximal and pin and in a similar fashion. After ensuring the correct
anterior to the adductor tubercle. This positioning placement of both pins and checking their distance
should avoid the trochlea and a possible ACL tunnel, in (Fig 7), a 9-mm reamer is used to drill both tunnels to a
cases of combined ligament reconstruction. depth of 25 mm (socket) and a passing suture is placed
The femoral attachment of the PLT has been reported into each tunnel to facilitate graft passage.
to be located 18.5 mm anterior to the FCL insertion, in The graft used for this technique is a split Achilles
the anterior fifth of the popliteal sulcus.1 An arthrot- tendon allograft (Allosource, Centennial, CO). The
omy is required due to the intra-articular insertion of minimum length of the graft required is 22 cm. Both
the PLT. A vertical incision is made to the lateral capsule grafts are prepared to create 9 " 20 mm sized bone
at the PLT insertion site with care not to damage the plugs, and 2 no. 5 Fiberwire (Arthrex) sutures are
ITB. The PLT attachment is identified, and sharp threaded through drill holes placed in each bone plug.
Fig 5. Desired placement of the distal tunnels on an exposed right knee. (A) Collateral aiming guide (fibular) placed on the
fibular head from a point immediately above the lateral champagne glass drop-off, pointing to the posteromedial downslope of
the fibular styloid. (B) Collateral aiming guide (tibial) positioned over the flat spot on the proximal tibia, aiming the popliteus
sulcus on the posterolateral aspect of this bone. The exit point for the tibial tunnel should be located 1 cm proximal and medial
relative to the exit point of the fibular tunnel.
ANATOMIC POSTEROLATERAL CORNER RECONSTRUCTION e5
The distal aspect of both grafts are tubularized with a dissection, the FCL graft is passed under the superficial
whip-stitched suture to a 7-mm diameter. Using sutures layer of the ITB (Fig 8B) and then through the fibular
previously left in place, the grafts are pulled into their head tunnel in an anterolateral to posteromedial di-
respective femoral tunnels and each one is secured with rection, using the passing sutures previously left in
a 7 " 20 mm cannulated screw (Arthrex) with the aid place. The FCL graft is then secured anterolaterally into
of a guide pin placed between the cancellous surface of the fibular head with a 7 " 23 mm bioabsorbable screw
the bone plugs and the rim of the tunnels. It is rec- (Arthrex), using a guide pin placed below the graft in
ommended to use a cannulated plastic sheath protector the distal aspect of the tunnel. During this fixation,
(Arthrex) during screw placement in order to avoid tension is applied to the distal end of the graft and the
damage to the graft (Fig 8A). knee should be at 20! of flexion and neutral rotation,
After both grafts are firmly secured into their femoral while applying a gentle valgus force to reduce any
tunnels, they are passed distally through the soft tis- lateral compartment laxity (Fig 9A).
sues. The popliteus graft is passed along the popliteal Both grafts are then passed together through the tibial
hiatus in the posterolateral capsule and should exit tunnel, using a passing suture previously left in place,
between the lateral gastrocnemius and the soleus from posterior to anterior. After cycling the knee
muscles. After creating a soft tissue channel by blunt several times through a complete range of motion, the
grafts are fixed to the tibia with a 9 " 23 mm bio-
absorbable screw (Arthrex). During this fixation, the
knee is kept in 60! of flexion and neutral rotation,
while an assistant applies tension to the distal end of
both grafts (Fig 9B).
After fixation of all structures, knee stability and
range of motion are assessed to confirm that neither
residual laxity nor joint overconstraint exists. A backup
fixation can be performed with a staple placed just
below the tibial tunnel, securing both grafts. After irri-
gation of the tissues, the lateral capsule is closed with a
no. 0 Vicryl (Ethicon, Somerville, NJ) suture and the
ITB incision is closed with no. 0 Vicryl (Ethicon) su-
tures. The portion of the anterior arm of the long head
of the biceps femoris partially detached during the
exposure of the fibular head should be reattached with
sutures through the periosteum of the lateral edge of
Fig 7. Intraoperative image demonstrating the relationship the fibular head. The superficial layers are closed in a
between the fibular collateral ligament and popliteus femoral regular fashion using subcutaneous skin sutures. The
tunnels in a right knee. The anatomic distance between these pearls and pitfalls of this procedure are summarized in
2 structures is reported to be 18.5 mm. Table 2.
e6 R. SERRA CRUZ ET AL.
Fig 8. (A) Right knee during the proximal fixation of the fibular collateral ligament (FCL) and popliteus grafts with metallic
interference screws. The screws are placed between the cancellous surface of the bone block and the rim of the tunnels. (B) Distal
passage of the grafts after proximal fixation. The popliteus graft has already been passed through the popliteus hiatus, and the
fibular collateral ligament graft is about to be passed underneath the superficial layer of the iliotibial band (ITB), as indicated by
the blue arrow.
Fig 9. Distal fixation of the posterolateral corner reconstruction grafts in a right knee. (A) Fibular collateral ligament (FCL)
fixation with a 7 " 23 bioabsorbable screw. The knee is placed at approximately 20! of flexion and neutral rotation, and a gentle
valgus force is applied, while the assistant applies tension to the graft. (B) Simultaneous tibial fixation of both grafts with a 9 " 23
bioabsorbable screw. This time the knee is positioned at 60! of flexion and neutral rotation. PFL, popliteofibular ligament.
ANATOMIC POSTEROLATERAL CORNER RECONSTRUCTION e7
4 months postoperatively. Situations in which the 2004, LaPrade et al.21 described an anatomic recon-
tibia is subject to posterior sag or external rotation struction of the PLC using the native attachments of the
should also be avoided for a period of 4 months. FCL, PLT, and PFL. This was one of the earliest de-
Running exercises, along with speed and agility scriptions of a surgical option to recreate the anatomy of
workouts, may begin once appropriate strength and the 3 main static stabilizers of the PLC and is the basis
power characteristics have been developed, typically for our current approach. This technique restores near-
around 6 months after surgery. Return to sports or native varus and rotational stability to the knee. Out-
activity is allowed when normal strength, stability, comes studies have shown significant postoperative
and knee range of motion comparable to the contra- improvement in scores for varus opening at 20! ,
lateral side have been achieved (usually between 6 external rotation at 30! , reverse pivot shift, and single-
and 9 months and based on associated cruciate liga- leg hop.20
ment or other structure surgery). Table 3 provides a The biomechanical importance of this anatomic-based
summary of the rehabilitation program. technique was reinforced in 2010 by McCarthy and
associates24 as they demonstrated the need for an
Discussion anatomic reconstruction of the PFL to restore knee
This anatomic PLC reconstruction technique has stability. LaPrade et al.22 published a biomechanical
demonstrated improved subjective and objective pa- analysis of the PLT, demonstrating its role as a primary
tient outcomes compared with nonsurgical treatment static stabilizer to external rotation. A prospective
or repair14,20 and has been reported to restore near evaluation by Geeslin et al.14 demonstrated significant
native knee stability in cadaveric studies.21,22 Grade III improvements in all IKDC objective scores, side-to-side
injuries to the PLC are best treated with surgical inter- differences in varus stress radiographs, and improve-
vention, as symptomatic instability of the knee remains ment in mean Cincinnati and IKDC subjective out-
a significant risk when treated nonoperatively.5,23 In comes scores.
e8 R. SERRA CRUZ ET AL.
Several alternative techniques for treatment of PLC their systematic review, concluding that reconstruction
injuries have been proposed. While some investigators provides better outcomes than repair of PLC injuries;
have advocated direct repair of the injured structures, however, no recommendations were made with regard
various reconstructive options have been reported. to the type of reconstruction. Yoon and colleagues27
These PLC reconstruction techniques can be generally compared a nonanatomic fibular sling PLC reconstruc-
categorized as fibular sling with or without posterior tion technique with an anatomic-based reconstruction
capsular shift, biceps femoris tendon transfer, or and demonstrated improved Lysholm scores and
anatomic-based reconstruction as described improved varus and external rotation laxity in the
elsewhere.25 anatomic reconstruction group.
While results of different techniques do not provide As a result of these findings, we recommend anatomic
sufficient data for direct comparison, recent systematic reconstruction of acute PLC injuries with treatment of
reviews of PLC injuries by Geeslin et al.25 and Moulton concomitant injuries in a single surgery. This recom-
et al.26 reported that techniques were not standardized mendation holds true in chronic situations; however,
and differed based on time to presentation, surgeon caution should be taken with chronic injuries to evaluate
preference, and availability of reparable tissue. In gen- for varus malalignment, which should be addressed
eral, surgeons advocate for reconstruction of chronic prior to any reconstructive procedure for the PLC.
injuries but differ significantly in management of acute Considering the contribution of the PLC to the
injuries. In the setting of bony avulsions or acute in- posterolateral stability of the knee and the inherent
juries with adequate soft tissue quality, some in- bony instability of the convex lateral tibial plateau, it
vestigators chose to restore knee stability with primary has become clear that restoration of the native anatomy
repair of damaged structures, with staged reconstruc- of PLC structures is of paramount importance.25,26,28
tion of associated cruciate injuries. This acute repair While studies regarding the anatomic-based recon-
strategy was associated with a 38% failure rate and was struction have demonstrated promising results, one
less successful when compared with a 9% failure rate in concern regarding this technique is its high technical
more comprehensive reconstructive options with con- demand and steep learning curve (Table 4 summarizes
current cruciate ligament reconstruction. Levy et al.15 the advantages and limitations of the anatomic recon-
further reinforced the importance of reconstruction in struction technique).
ANATOMIC POSTEROLATERAL CORNER RECONSTRUCTION e9
Table 4. Advantages and Risks/Limitations for the Anatomic Posterolateral Corner Reconstruction Technique
Advantages Risks/Limitations
The technique restores the 3 main stabilizers of the posterolateral The use of allograft tissue can predispose to a small risk of disease
aspect of the knee. transmission.
Anatomic posterolateral corner reconstruction can be performed in This surgical approach is technically demanding, requiring
both acute and chronic settings in appropriately indicated patients. proficiency with surgical dissection
This technique has been evaluated biomechanically and validated Damage to the common peroneal nerve can potentially occur;
using patient reported outcome studies. careful dissection and placement of retractors should be observed.
The anatomy of the posterolateral corner structures can usually be Fracture of the fibular head: correct placement of the tunnel reduces
visualized to ensure appropriate placement of the tunnels. the risk of this complication
Patients with associated proximal tibiofibular joint instability will Failure due to unrecognized malalignment; especially in chronic
benefit from this reconstruction since it will add stability to this cases, the patient should have a complete evaluation of the
joint. standing alignment and tibial slope.
Long-term studies should be performed to ensure reconstruction. Deficiency of the posterolateral struc-
maintenance of both stability and functionality, tures as a cause of graft failure. Am J Sports Med 2000;28:
restored after surgery. This technique will continue to 32-39.
be studied and evaluated within our group, and we also 11. LaPrade RF, Resig S, Wentorf F, Lewis JL. The effects of
grade III posterolateral knee complex injuries on anterior
encourage other surgeons to further evaluate the val-
cruciate ligament graft force. A biomechanical analysis.
idity of this technique and to perform continued
Am J Sports Med 1999;27:469-475.
assessment for long-term results. 12. LaPrade RF, Muench C, Wentorf F, Lewis JL. The effect of
injury to the posterolateral structures of the knee on force
References in a posterior cruciate ligament graft: a biomechanical
1. LaPrade RF, Ly TV, Wentorf FA, Engebretsen L. The study. Am J Sports Med 2002;30:233-238.
posterolateral attachments of the knee: a qualitative and 13. Black BS, Stannard JP. Repair versus reconstruction in
quantitative morphologic analysis of the fibular collateral acute posterolateral instability of the knee. Sports Med
ligament, popliteus tendon, popliteofibular ligament, and Arthrosc 2015;23:22-26.
lateral gastrocnemius tendon. Am J Sports Med 2003;31: 14. Geeslin AG, LaPrade RF. Outcomes of treatment of acute
854-860. grade-III isolated and combined posterolateral knee in-
2. LaPrade RF. Force measurements on the fibular collateral juries: a prospective case series and surgical technique.
ligament, popliteofibular ligament, and popliteus tendon J Bone Joint Surg Am 2011;93:1672-1683.
to applied loads. Am J Sports Med 2004;32:1695-1701. 15. Levy BA, Dajani KA, Morgan JA, Shah JP, Dahm DL,
3. Gollehon DL, Torzilli PA, Warren RF. The role of the Stuart MJ. Repair versus reconstruction of the fibular
posterolateral and cruciate ligaments in the stability of the collateral ligament and posterolateral corner in the
human knee. A biomechanical study. J Bone Joint Surg Am multiligament-injured knee. Am J Sports Med 2010;38:
1987;69:233-242. 804-809.
4. LaPrade RF, Bollom TS, Wentorf FA, Wills NJ, Meister K. 16. LaPrade RF, Wentorf F. Diagnosis and treatment of
Mechanical properties of the posterolateral structures of posterolateral knee injuries. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2002:
the knee. Am J Sports Med 2005;33:1386-1391. 110-121.
5. LaPrade RF, Terry GC. Injuries to the posterolateral aspect 17. LaPrade RF, Heikes C, Bakker AJ, Jakobsen RB. The
of the knee. Association of anatomic injury patterns with reproducibility and repeatability of varus stress radio-
clinical instability. Am J Sports Med 1997;25:433-438. graphs in the assessment of isolated fibular collateral lig-
6. Noyes FR, Barber-Westin SD, Albright JC. An analysis of ament and grade-III posterolateral knee injuries. An
the causes of failure in 57 consecutive posterolateral in vitro biomechanical study. J Bone Joint Surg Am
operative procedures. Am J Sports Med 2006;34:1419- 2008;90:2069-2076.
1430. 18. Arthur A. Proximal tibial opening wedge osteotomy as the
7. LaPrade RF, Hamilton CD, Engebretsen L. Treatment of initial treatment for chronic posterolateral corner defi-
acute and chronic combined anterior cruciate ligament ciency in the varus knee: a prospective clinical study. Am J
and posterolateral knee ligament injuries. Sports Med Sports Med 2007;35:1844-1850.
Arthrosc 1997;5:91-99. 19. LaPrade RF, Gilbert TJ, Bollom TS, Wentorf F,
8. LaPrade RF, Wentorf FA, Crum JA. Assessment of healing Chaljub G. The magnetic resonance imaging appear-
of grade III posterolateral corner injuries: an in vivo ance of individual structures of the posterolateral knee:
model. J Orthop Res 2004;22:970-975. a prospective study of normal knees and knees with
9. Griffith CJ, Wijdicks CA, Goerke U, Michaeli S, surgically verified grade III injuries. Am J Sports Med
Ellermann J, LaPrade RF. Outcomes of untreated 2000;28:191-199.
posterolateral knee injuries: an in vivo canine model. Knee 20. LaPrade RF, Johansen S, Agel J, Risberg MA,
Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 2011;19:1192-1197. Moksnes H, Engebretsen L. Outcomes of an anatomic
10. Harner CD, Vogrin TM, Hoher J, Ma CB, Woo SL. posterolateral knee reconstruction. J Bone Joint Surg Am
Biomechanical analysis of a posterior cruciate ligament 2010;92:16-22.
e10 R. SERRA CRUZ ET AL.
21. LaPrade RF, Johansen S, Wentorf FA, Engebretsen L, reconstruction through a tibial tunnel. Am J Sports Med
Esterberg JL, Tso A. An analysis of an anatomical 2010;38:1674-1681.
posterolateral knee reconstruction: an in vitro biome- 25. Geeslin AG, Moulton SG, LaPrade RF. A systematic re-
chanical study and development of a surgical technique. view of the outcomes of posterolateral corner knee in-
Am J Sports Med 2004;32:1405-1414. juries. Part 1. Surgical treatment of acute injuries. Am J
22. LaPrade RF, Wozniczka JK, Stellmaker MP, Wijdicks CA. Sports Med 2016;44:1336-1342.
Analysis of the static function of the popliteus tendon 26. Moulton SG, Geeslin AG, LaPrade RF. A systematic re-
and evaluation of an anatomic reconstruction: the “fifth view of the outcomes of posterolateral corner knee in-
ligament” of the knee. Am J Sports Med 2010;38: juries. Part 2. Surgical treatment of chronic injuries
543-549. [published online August 10, 2015]. Am J Sports Med.
23. LaPrade RF, Griffith CJ, Coobs BR, Geeslin AG, Johansen S, doi:10.1177/0363546515593950.
Engebretsen L. Improving outcomes for posterolateral knee 27. Yoon KH, Bae DK, Ha JH, Park SW. Anatomic recon-
injuries. J Orthop Res 2014;32:485-491. structive surgery for posterolateral instability of the knee.
24. McCarthy M, Camarda L, Wijdicks CA, Johansen S, Arthroscopy 2006;22:159-165.
Engebretsen L, LaPrade RF. Anatomic posterolateral knee 28. LaPrade RF. Posterolateral knee injuries: anatomy, evaluation,
reconstructions require a popliteofibular ligament and treatment. New York: Thieme, 2006.