Evaluation of anterior intermeniscal ligament in types of bucket-handle tear with using magnetic resonance ımaging


Koç A., Tokmak T. T., KARABIYIK Ö., Uçarkuş T.

Knee, cilt.56, ss.366-372, 2025 (SCI-Expanded, Scopus) identifier identifier identifier

  • Yayın Türü: Makale / Tam Makale
  • Cilt numarası: 56
  • Basım Tarihi: 2025
  • Doi Numarası: 10.1016/j.knee.2025.06.001
  • Dergi Adı: Knee
  • Derginin Tarandığı İndeksler: Science Citation Index Expanded (SCI-EXPANDED), Scopus, Academic Search Premier, CINAHL, MEDLINE
  • Sayfa Sayıları: ss.366-372
  • Anahtar Kelimeler: Bucket-handle tear, Intermeniscal ligament, Magnetic resonance ımaging
  • Erciyes Üniversitesi Adresli: Evet

Özet

Background: Anterior intermeniscal ligament (AIML) has a beneficial influence on knee biomechanics, contributing to shock-absorbing function of the menisci and to the transmission of circumferential hoop stresses in the knee. Investigation of the relationship between meniscal bucket-handle tears and the AIML may help to elucidate AIML function. The aim of this study was to determine AIML according to anatomical insertions in groups composed of central and peripheral type bucket-handle tear cases. Methods: In total 104 cases with bucket-handle tear were re-evaluated with magnetic reonance imaging (MRI) for AIML and tear pattern. AIMLs were grouped according to the classification of Nelson and LaPrade. Two groups of bucket-handle tear cases were recorded according to the tear pattern as central or peripheral according to the Cooper classification. Chi-squared analysis and Fisher's exact test were used for correlation and significance analysis between AIML subtypes and the two types of bucket-handle tear. Results: No significant correlation was found between the AIML and the groups consisting of different patterns of bucket-handle tear (P = 0.063). Peripheral zone tears were found in 53 (51%) patients, whereas central zone tears were found in 51 (49%) patients. AIML was absent in 51 patients. Type I AIML was present in 21, type II in 24, and type III in eight patients. Conclusions: The distribution of AIML in different patterns of bucket-handle tear cases was not statistically significant and did not differ from the normal ratios specified in the literature.