Skip to main content

Table 4 A comparison of tunnel parameters in obese and non-obese patients within the same and different portal groups

From: Effect of anteromedial portal location on femoral tunnel inclination, length, and location in hamstring autograft-based single-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a prospective study

Variable

Obese versus non-obese patients in the MIAM group

Obese versus non-obese patients in the FAM group

Obese patients in the MIAM group versus obese patients in the FAM group

Non-obese patients in the MIAM group versus non-obese patients in the FAM group

Tunnel length (mm)

39.50 (range: 33–48) versus 43.38 (range: 37–55)*

30.31 (range: 24–35) versus 32.01 (range: 22–38)*

39.50 (range: 33–48) versus 30.31 (range: 24–35)*

43.38 (range: 37–55) versus 32.01 (range: 22–38)*

Tunnel inclination (°)

41.37 (range: 34.5–58) versus 44.95 (range: 34–61)*

36.26 (range:22.5–49) versus 39.61 (range: 25–48)*

41.37 (range: 34.5–58) versus 36.26 (range:22.5–49)*

44.95 (range: 34–61) versus 39.61 (range: 25–48)*

Proportion of zone C tunnel exits (%)

32.14 versus zero*

77.14 versus 57.64

32.14 versus 77.14*

Zero versus 57.64*

  1. FAM far anteromedial, MIAM modified inferior anteromedial
  2. *Indicates statistically significant comparisons (p < 0.05)