The Location of Anterior Cruciate Ligament Tears: A Prevalence Study Using Magnetic Resonance Imaging

Over the past decade, there has been a resurgence of interest in anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) preservation. Proximal and distal avulsion tears have been treated with arthroscopic primary repair, while augmented repair, remnant tensioning, primary repair with biological scaffold, and remnant preservation have been proposed for different types of midsubstance tears. Currently, the incidence of these different tear types is unknown.

To propose a magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) classification system for different tear types based on clinical relevance and to assess the distribution of these different ACL tear types.

Case series; Level of evidence, 4.

A retrospective search in an institutional radiographic database was performed for patients who underwent knee MRI at our institution between June 2014 and June 2016. Patients younger than 18 years and those with reports of chronic tears, partial tears, multiligamentous injuries, were excluded. Tear types were graded as proximal avulsion (distal remnant length >90% of total ligament length, type I), proximal (75%-90%, type II), midsubstance (25%-75%, type III), distal (10%-25%, type IV), and distal avulsion (<10%, type V). An orthopaedic surgeon, a radiologist, and a research fellow graded the tear type on 30 MRIs to determine reliability, and the research fellow graded all MRIs. Inter- and intraobserver reliability were measured using kappa statistics.

A total of 353 patients (57% male; mean age, 37.1 years; range, 18.1-81.2 years) were included. Interobserver reliability was 0.670 (95% confidence interval, 0.505-0.836), and intraobserver reliability ranged from 0.741 to 0.934. Incidence of type I tears was 16%, type II tears 27%, type III tears 52%, type IV tears 1%, and type V tears 3% (2.5% with bony avulsion). Type I tears were more common in patients older than 35 years compared with those younger than 35 years (23% vs 8%; P < .001).

This classification system was reliable in assessing tear location in acute ACL injuries. Type I tears were seen in 16%, type II in 27%, and type III in 52% of patients in our cohort. These data suggest that there may be greater potential application for ACL preservation techniques.