scholarly journals Clinical outcome of anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction with modified transtibial and anteromedial portal

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
S. Vijayan ◽  
H. Kyalakond ◽  
M. S. Kulkarni ◽  
M. N. Aroor ◽  
S. Shetty ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Anterior Cruciate Ligament ◽  
Acl Reconstruction ◽  
Functional Outcomes ◽  
Pivot Shift ◽  
Cruciate Ligament ◽  
Anteromedial Portal ◽  
Anterior Drawer ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Kt 1000 ◽  
Anterior Cruciate

AbstractArthroscopic ACL reconstruction is the current standard care of treatment for anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injuries. Modified transtibial (mTT) and anteromedial portal (AMP) techniques aim at the anatomical placement of femoral tunnel. Controversy existed in the literature with regard to the outcome of these techniques. Hence, we designed a retrospective comparative study to analyse the clinical and functional outcomes of mTT and AMP techniques. We hypothesized that there would be no difference between the clinical and functional outcomes in mTT and AMP techniques. This retrospective observational study was conducted in consecutive patients who underwent arthroscopic ACL reconstruction using semitendinosus-gracilis (STG) quadrupled graft in our tertiary care centre with a minimum follow-up of two years. Out of 69 patients, 37 had undergone ACL reconstruction by mTT technique and remaining by AMP technique. All the patients were assessed clinically by anterior drawer, Lachman’s, pivot shift and single-legged hop test. Lysholm Knee Scoring Scale and International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) subjective knee evaluation score were used for the functional status. Knee instability was assessed objectively by KT-1000 arthrometer. There was no statistically significant difference in baseline demographic characteristics between mTT and AMP groups. At the end of 2 years, no statistically significant difference was noted in the anterior drawer and Lachman’s test. Though not significant, IKDC scores and Lysholm’s scores showed a better outcome in the AMP group when compared to the mTT group. AMP group showed significantly better outcome with KT-1000 arthrometer. Based on the results obtained, we presume that overall both mTT and AMP have similar functional outcome. However, as AMP technique offers significantly improved subjective rotational stability on pivot shift test, better hop limb symmetry index and KT 1000 readings compared to mTT, we suggest AMP over mTT.

Is Quadriceps Tendon Autograft a Better Choice Than Hamstring Autograft for Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction? A Comparative Study With a Mean Follow-up of 3.6 Years

2017 ◽  
Vol 45 (6) ◽  
pp. 1326-1332 ◽  
Author(s):  
Etienne Cavaignac ◽  
Benoit Coulin ◽  
Philippe Tscholl ◽  
Nik Nik Mohd Fatmy ◽  
Victoria Duthon ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Anterior Cruciate Ligament ◽  
Acl Reconstruction ◽  
Functional Outcomes ◽  
Pivot Shift ◽  
Cruciate Ligament ◽  
Quadriceps Tendon ◽  
Isokinetic Strength ◽  
Kt 1000 ◽  
Anterior Cruciate

Background: The quadriceps tendon (QT) autograft is known as an effective graft for anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction and shows a similar functional outcome to the bone-patellar tendon-bone (BPTB) in randomized controlled trials, with a lesser incidence of complications. Up until now, only 2 studies have compared QT to hamstring tendon (HT) autograft. Hypothesis: The functional outcomes of the QT technique are at least as good as those of the HT technique, with the same morbidity. Study Design: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. Methods: Ninety-five patients underwent isolated ACL reconstruction between January 1 and December 31, 2012. Fifty underwent ACL reconstruction with the QT and 45 with the HT. The same surgical technique, fixation method, and postoperative protocol were used in both groups. The following parameters were evaluated: surgical revisions, functional outcome (Lysholm, Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score [KOOS], Tegner, subjective International Knee Documentation Committee), joint stability (KT-1000, Lachman, pivot shift), anterior knee pain (Shelbourne-Trumper score), and isokinetic strength. Descriptive statistics are presented for these variables using the Student t test. Results: Eighty-six patients (45 QT, 41 HT) were reviewed with a mean follow-up of 3.6 ± 0.4 years; minimum follow-up was 3 years. There were 4 reoperations in the QT group (including 1 ACL revision) and 3 in the HT group (including 2 ACL revisions) ( P > .05). The Lysholm (89 ± 6.9 vs 83.1 ± 5.3), KOOS Symptoms (90 ± 11.2 vs 81 ± 10.3), and KOOS Sport (82 ± 11.3 vs 67 ± 12.4) scores were significantly better in the QT group than in the HT group. In terms of stability, the mean side-to-side difference was 1.1 ± 0.9 mm for the QT group and 3.1 ± 1.3 mm for the HT group based on KT-1000 measurements ( P < .005). The negative Lachman component was higher in the QT group than in the HT group (90% vs 46%, P < .005). There was a trend for the negative pivot-shift component to be higher in the QT group than in the HT group (90% vs 64%, P = .052). The Shelbourne-Trumper score was the same in both groups. There was no difference between groups in terms of isokinetic strength. Conclusion: The use of a QT graft in ACL reconstruction leads to equal or better functional outcomes than does the use of an HT graft, without affecting morbidity.

scholarly journals Hybrid Transtibial Femoral Preparation for Transphyseal Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: A Radiographic Comparison With the Transtibial and Anteromedial Portal Techniques

2021 ◽  
Vol 9 (11) ◽  
pp. 232596712110545
Author(s):  
D. Landry Jarvis ◽  
Danica D. Vance ◽  
Emily K. Reinke ◽  
Jonathan C. Riboh
Keyword(s):  
Anterior Cruciate Ligament ◽  
Acl Reconstruction ◽  
Femoral Tunnel ◽  
Cruciate Ligament ◽  
Calculated Data ◽  
Significant Finding ◽  
Anteromedial Portal ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Anterior Cruciate ◽  
Tunnel Angle

Background: Transphyseal anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction remains the most commonly used technique for pubescent patients. The transtibial (TT) drilling technique creates vertical and central femoral tunnels to minimize the physeal area of injury at the expense of a nonanatomic femoral tunnel. The hybrid TT (HTT) technique offers the potential of an anatomic femoral position with tunnel geometry similar to that using the TT technique. Purpose/Hypothesis: The purpose was to perform a radiographic comparison of the HTT technique with TT and anteromedial portal (AM) techniques in adolescent patients undergoing transphyseal ACL reconstruction. It was hypothesized that femoral tunnels created during HTT would be similar to TT tunnels but significantly more vertical and central than AM tunnels. Study Design: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. Methods: We retrospectively screened primary transphyseal ACL reconstructions performed in adolescents at our institution between 2013 and 2019. The youngest 20 eligible patients were selected from each technique cohort: TT, AM, and HTT. Postoperative radiographs were assessed for the coronal femoral tunnel angle, as well as the location of the tunnel-physis penetration on the anteroposterior and lateral views. Physeal lesion surface area was calculated. Data were compared among the 3 groups using 1-way analysis of variance followed by pairwise comparisons. Results: Included were 47 patients with a mean ± SD age of 14.3 ± 1.2 years (n = 9 with TT, 18 with AM, and 20 with HTT techniques). The coronal tunnel angle was significantly more vertical in the TT (60.7° ± 7.2°) and HTT (54.4° ± 5.7) groups as compared with the AM group (48.8° ± 5.9; P = .0037 and P = .02, respectively). There was no significant difference between the TT and HTT groups ( P = .066). The only significant finding regarding femoral tunnel location was that the HTT tunnels (28.9% ± 4.8%) penetrated the physis more centrally than did the AM tunnels (20.0% ± 5.1%; P = .00002) on lateral radiographs. Conclusion: The HTT technique presents an option for transphyseal ACL reconstruction, with femoral tunnel obliquity and estimated physeal disruption similar to that of the TT technique and significantly less than that of the AM technique. The HTT technique also results in the most central physeal perforation of all techniques, predominantly in the sagittal plane.

scholarly journals Hybrid Transtibial Femoral Preparation for Transphyseal Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: A Radiographic Comparison to Transtibial and Anteromedial Portal Techniques

2021 ◽  
Vol 9 (7_suppl3) ◽  
pp. 2325967121S0008
Author(s):  
D.Landry Jarvis ◽  
Danica D. Vance ◽  
Jonathan C. Riboh
Keyword(s):  
Anterior Cruciate Ligament ◽  
Acl Reconstruction ◽  
Sagittal Plane ◽  
Femoral Tunnel ◽  
Cruciate Ligament ◽  
Calculated Data ◽  
Anteromedial Portal ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Text Figure ◽  
Anterior Cruciate

Background: Transphyseal anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction remains the most commonly used technique for pubescent patients. The principles of creating vertical and central femoral tunnels are well accepted to minimize physeal area of injury and are typically accomplished with a transtibial (TT) technique. This, however, may come at the expense of a non-anatomic tunnel. The hybrid transtibial (HTT) technique offers the potential of combining an anatomic femoral position with tunnel geometry similar to the TT technique but has never been assessed in a clinical cohort. Hypothesis/Purpose: We hypothesized that tunnels created by a HTT technique would be similar in orientation and physeal location to TT tunnels, but significantly more vertical and central than tunnels created with an anteromedial portal (AM). Methods: We retrospectively screened all ACL reconstructions performed in children aged 10 to 16 years, at our institution between 2013 to 2019, with the requirements of having a transphyseal reconstruction and an available post-operative radiographs. Radiographs were then assessed for the coronal femoral tunnel angle (FTA), as well as the location of the tunnel-physis penetration on the AP (LTAP) and lateral (LTL) views. Physeal lesion surface area was calculated. Data were compared between the three groups using ANOVA. Results: Forty-seven patients met eligibility criteria with 9 TT, 18 AM, and 20 HTT patients. Mean patient age was 14.3 +/- 1.2 years. The FTA was significantly more vertical in the TT (60.7o +/-7.2) and HTT (54.4o +/- 5.7) groups as compared to the AM group (48.8o +/- 5.9); p = 0.0037 and p = 0.02 respectively. There was no significant difference between the TT and HTT groups ( p = 0.066). The LTAP was not significantly different between groups (p = 0.097). The LTL demonstrated that the HTT tunnels penetrated the physis at a more central location in the sagittal plane (28.9% +/- 4.8%) than the AM tunnels (20.0% +/- 5.1%, p = 0.00002), but was statistically indistinguishable from the TT (24.4%+/- 4.0%, p= 0.066) tunnels. Conclusion: The hybrid transtibial technique presents an option for transphyseal ACL reconstruction, with femoral tunnel obliquity and estimated physeal disruption similar to the TT technique, significantly less than the AM technique. The HTT also results in the most central physeal perforation of all techniques, predominantly in the sagittal plane. With the known ability of the HTT technique to recreate an anatomic femoral footprint, this may represent the “best of both worlds” for transphyseal ACL reconstruction. Tables/Figures: [Figure: see text][Figure: see text][Figure: see text][Figure: see text]

scholarly journals A modified anterior drawer test for anterior cruciate ligament ruptures

2021 ◽  
Vol 16 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Guang-lei Zhao ◽  
Jin-yang Lyu ◽  
Chang-quan Liu ◽  
Jian-guo Wu ◽  
Jun Xia ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Anterior Cruciate Ligament ◽  
Pivot Shift ◽  
Cruciate Ligament ◽  
Characteristic Curve ◽  
Pivot Shift Test ◽  
Anterior Drawer ◽  
Lachman Test ◽  
Anterior Drawer Test ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Anterior Cruciate

Abstract Objective This study was aimed to utilize a modified anterior drawer test (MADT) to detect the anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) ruptures and investigate its accuracy compares with three traditional tests. Methods Four hundred patients were prospectively enrolled between January 2015 and September 2017 preoperatively to undergo knee arthroscopic surgeries. The MADT, anterior drawer test, Lachman test, and pivot shift test were used in the outpatient clinical setting and were compared statistically for their accuracy in terms of ACL ruptures, with arthroscopic findings as the gold standard. Results The prevalence of ACL ruptures in this study was 37.0%. The MADT demonstrated the highest sensitivity (0.89) and accuracy (0.92) among the four tests and had comparable specificity (0.94) and a positive predictive value (0.90) compared with the anterior drawer test, Lachman test, and pivot shift test. The diagnostic odds ratio (DOR) of MADT was 122.92, with other test values of no more than 55.45. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) for the MADT was 0.92 ± 0.01, with a significant difference compared with that for the anterior drawer test (z = 17.00, p < 0.001), Lachman test (z = 9.66, p = 0.002), and pivot shift test (z = 16.39, p < 0.001). The interobserver reproducibility of the MADT was good, with a kappa coefficient of 0.86. When diagnosing partial tears of ACL, the MADT was significantly more sensitive than the anterior drawer test (p < 0.001), Lachman test (p = 0.026), and pivot shift test (p = 0.013). The MADT showed similar sensitivity in detecting anteromedial and posterolateral bundle tears (p = 0.113) and no difference in diagnosing acute and chronic ACL ruptures (χ2 = 1.682, p = 0.195). Conclusions The MADT is also an alternative diagnostic test to detect ACL tear, which is equally superior to the anterior drawer test, Lachman test, and pivot shifting test. It could improve the diagnosis of ACL ruptures combined with other clinical information including injury history, clinical examination, and radiological findings. Levels of evidence Level II/observational diagnostic studies Trial registration Chinese Clinical Trial Registry. ChiCTR1900022945 /retrospectively registered

scholarly journals Xenograft for anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction was associated with high graft processing infection

2020 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Willem Van Der Merwe ◽  
Martin Lind ◽  
Peter Faunø ◽  
Kees Van Egmond ◽  
Stefano Zaffagnini ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Anterior Cruciate Ligament ◽  
Acl Reconstruction ◽  
Infection Rate ◽  
Pivot Shift ◽  
Cruciate Ligament ◽  
Pivot Shift Test ◽  
Tunnel Widening ◽  
Kt 1000 ◽  
Anterior Cruciate

Abstract Purpose To evaluate clinical ad radiological outcomes of anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction with an immunochemically modified porcine patellar tendon xenograft controlled against human Achilles tendon allograft at 24-month minimum follow-up. Methods 66 patients undergoing arthroscopic ACL reconstruction were randomized into 2 groups: 34 allografts and 32 xenografts treated to attenuate the host immune response. Follow-up was 24-month minimum. Anterior knee stability was measured as KT − 1000 side-to-side laxity difference (respect to the contralateral healthy knee). Functional performance was assessed by one-legged hop test. Objective manual pivot-shift test and subjective (IKDC, Tegner and SF-36) outcomes were collected. MRI and standard X-Ray were performed. Results 61 subjects (32 allograft, 29 xenograft) were evaluated at 12 and 24 months. Six of the subjects in xenograft group (20.6%) got an infection attributed to a water-based pathogen graft contamination in processing. Intention-to-treat analysis (using the last observation carried forward imputation method) revealed higher KT − 1000 laxity in xenograft group at 24-month follow-up (P = .042). Also pivot-shift was higher in xenograft group at 12-month (P = .015) and 24-month follow-up (P = .038). Per-protocol analysis (missing/contaminated subjects excluded) did not revealed clinical differences between groups. Tibial tunnel widening in the allograft group was low, whereas xenograft tunnel widening was within the expected range of 20–35% as reported in the literature. No immunological reactivity was associated to xenograft group. Conclusions High infection rate (20.6%) was reported in xenograft group. Both groups of patients achieved comparable clinical outcomes if missing/contaminated subjects are excluded. Improved harvesting/processing treatments in future studies using xenografts for ACL reconstruction are needed to reduce infection rate, otherwise xenograft should not be used in ACL reconstruction. Level of evidence Multicenter and double-blinded Randomized Controlled Clinical Trial, Level I.

scholarly journals Performance of the PROMIS in Patients After Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction

2018 ◽  
Vol 6 (5) ◽  
pp. 232596711877450 ◽  
Author(s):  
Elizabeth J. Scott ◽  
Robert Westermann ◽  
Nathalie A. Glass ◽  
Carolyn Hettrich ◽  
Brian R. Wolf ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Anterior Cruciate Ligament ◽  
Physical Function ◽  
Acl Reconstruction ◽  
Cruciate Ligament ◽  
Sf 36 ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Patient Reported ◽  
Floor Effects ◽  
Anterior Cruciate ◽  
Pro Instruments

Background: The Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) is designed to advance patient-reported outcome (PRO) instruments by utilizing question banks for major health domains. Purpose: To compare the responsiveness and construct validity of the PROMIS physical function computer adaptive test (PF CAT) with current PRO instruments for patients before and up to 2 years after anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction. Study Design: Cohort study (diagnosis); Level of evidence, 2. Methods: Initially, 157 patients completed the PROMIS PF CAT, Short Form–36 Health Survey (SF-36 physical function [PF] and general health [GH]), Marx Activity Rating Scale (MARS), Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS activities of daily living [ADL], sport, and quality of life [QOL]), and EuroQol–5 dimensions questionnaire (EQ-5D) at 6 weeks, 6 months, and 2 years after ACL reconstruction. Correlations between instruments, ceiling and floor effects, effect sizes (Cohen d), and standardized response means to describe responsiveness were evaluated. Subgroup analyses compared participants with and without additional arthroscopic procedures using linear mixed models. Results: At baseline, 6 weeks, and 6 months, the PROMIS PF CAT showed excellent or excellent-good correlations with the SF-36 PF ( r = 0.75-0.80, P < .01), KOOS-ADL ( r = 0.63-0.70, P < .01), and KOOS-sport ( r = 0.32-0.69, P < .01); excellent-good correlation with the EQ-5D ( r = 0.60-0.71, P < .01); and good correlation with the KOOS-QOL ( r = 0.52-0.58, P < .01). As expected, there were poor correlations with the MARS ( r = 0.00-0.24, P < .01) and SF-36 GH ( r = 0.16-0.34, P < .01 ). At 2 years, the PROMIS PF CAT showed good to excellent correlations with all PRO instruments ( r = 0.42-0.72, P < .01), including the MARS ( r = 0.42, P < .01), indicating frequent return to preinjury function. The PROMIS PF CAT had the fewest ceiling or floor effects of all instruments tested, and patients answered, on average, 4 questions. There was no significant difference in baseline physical function scores between subgroups; at follow-up, all groups showed improvements in scores that were not statistically different. Conclusion: The PROMIS PF CAT is a valid tool to assess outcomes after ACL reconstruction up to 2 years after surgery, demonstrating the highest responsiveness to change with the fewest ceiling and floor effects and a low time burden among all instruments tested. The PROMIS PF CAT is a beneficial alternative for assessing physical function in adults before and after ACL reconstruction.

Outcomes After Biologically Augmented Isolated Meniscal Repair With Marrow Venting Are Comparable With Those After Meniscal Repair With Concomitant Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction

2017 ◽  
Vol 45 (6) ◽  
pp. 1341-1348 ◽  
Author(s):  
Chase S. Dean ◽  
Jorge Chahla ◽  
Lauren M. Matheny ◽  
Justin J. Mitchell ◽  
Robert F. LaPrade
Keyword(s):  
Anterior Cruciate Ligament ◽  
Acl Reconstruction ◽  
Cruciate Ligament ◽  
Meniscal Repair ◽  
Intercondylar Notch ◽  
Inclusion Criteria ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Outcome Scores ◽  
Anterior Cruciate ◽  
Biological Augmentation

Background: Meniscal repair in the setting of anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction has demonstrated superior outcomes compared with isolated meniscal repair. Limited evidence exists for the effects of biological augmentation in isolated meniscal repair, particularly as compared with meniscal repair with concomitant ACL reconstruction. Purpose/Hypothesis: The purpose of this study was to compare the outcomes and survivorship of meniscal repair in 2 cohorts of patients: meniscal repair with biological augmentation using a marrow venting procedure (MVP) of the intercondylar notch, and meniscal repair with concomitant ACL reconstruction. We hypothesized that the clinical outcomes and survivorship of meniscal repair with concomitant ACL reconstruction would be improved compared with meniscal repair with biological augmentation. Study Design: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. Methods: Inclusion criteria were skeletally mature patients aged ≥16 years who underwent inside-out meniscal repair and either a concomitant MVP of the intercondylar notch or ACL reconstruction. Patients were excluded from this study if they were skeletally immature, underwent meniscus root or radial tear repair, or underwent meniscal repair with concurrent ligamentous reconstruction not limited to the ACL. At the preoperative evaluation and a minimum 2 years after the index meniscal repair procedure, patients were administered a subjective questionnaire. Differences in outcome scores, survivorship, and failure rates between the cohorts were assessed. Failure was defined as reoperation with meniscectomy or revision meniscal repair. Results: There were 109 patients (52 female, 57 male) who met the inclusion criteria for this study. There were 37 knees in cohort 1 (isolated meniscal repair plus MVP) and 72 knees in cohort 2 (meniscal repair plus ACL reconstruction). The failure status was known in 95 patients, and patient-reported outcome scores were obtained in 89 (82%) patients. Both cohorts demonstrated a significant improvement in all outcome scores, and there was no significant difference in any of the preoperative or postoperative outcome measures. The overall failure rate was 9.5% (9/95). There were 4 (12.9%) failures in cohort 1 and 5 failures (7.8%) in cohort 2, with no significant difference in failures between the cohorts ( P = .429). There was a significant association between failure and female sex ( P = .001). Conclusion: The most important finding in this study was that there was no difference in outcomes in meniscal repair performed with biological augmentation using an MVP versus that performed concomitantly with ACL reconstruction. The similar outcomes reported for meniscal repair with an MVP and meniscal repair with ACL reconstruction may be partly attributed to biological augmentation.

Surgical Management of Simultaneous Anterior Cruciate Ligament and Patellar Tendon Ruptures: A Systematic Review

2017 ◽  
Vol 31 (09) ◽  
pp. 875-883 ◽  
Author(s):  
Carlos Meheux ◽  
Robert Jack ◽  
Patrick McCulloch ◽  
David Lintner ◽  
Joshua Harris
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Anterior Cruciate Ligament ◽  
Acl Reconstruction ◽  
Cruciate Ligament ◽  
Activity Level ◽  
Two Stage ◽  
One Stage ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Anterior Cruciate ◽  
The One

AbstractThis study performs a systematic review to determine (1) if a significant difference exists in return to preinjury activity level between one- and two-stage treatment of combined anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) and patellar tendon (PT) tears; and (2) if a significant difference exists in the number of postoperative complications between the two differing surgical treatment approaches. A systematic review was performed using Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines and registered on PROSPERO. MEDLINE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, SCOPUS, and Sport Discus were searched for English language level I–IV evidence studies on either one- (simultaneous) or two-stage (sequential) surgical treatment of simultaneously sustained ipsilateral ACL and PT tears. The approach to initial evaluation, diagnosis, treatment, and outcomes were qualitatively analyzed. Methodological quality assessment of all included studies was completed using the Methodological Index for Non-randomized Studies (MINORS). The Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) tool was used to assess quality of evidence and provide strength of recommendation. Statistical analyses were done using Fischer's exact test. Eleven articles (18 patients; 83% males; mean age, 31.1 ± 10.1 years; mean follow-up, 2.2 ± 1.7 years; and mean MINORS 7.8/16) were analyzed. Eight patients had a one-stage procedure (primary PT repair and ACL reconstruction), and 10 patients underwent a two-stage procedure (primary PT repair first followed by ACL reconstruction) with mean 28 ± 45.7 weeks (5 weeks–3 years) between surgeries. The rate for return to preinjury activity level after surgery was not significantly different between one- (88%) and two-stage (100%) (p = 0.444). There was a significantly higher complication rate (p = 0.023) in the one-stage (stiffness, instability, and patella baja) versus two-stage surgery (no complications). There was no significant difference in return to preinjury activity level between one- and two-stage PT repair and ACL reconstruction. However, the one-stage combined surgery had a significantly higher complication rate compared with two-stage surgery. The level of evidence is IV.

Clinical Outcome of Fixed Versus Adjustable Loop Cortical Suspension Devices in Arthroscopic Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction

2020 ◽  
Vol 22 (3) ◽  
pp. 181-185
Author(s):  
Ramy Said Assaad Ahmed Mohamed ◽  
Mohamed Hossam El-Din El-Shafie ◽  
Mohamed Ahmed El-Sheikh
Keyword(s):  
Anterior Cruciate Ligament ◽  
Acl Reconstruction ◽  
Ligament Reconstruction ◽  
Cruciate Ligament ◽  
Loop Group ◽  
Lysholm Score ◽  
Graft Fixation ◽  
Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Anterior Cruciate

Background. Anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction has remained the gold standard for ACL injuries, especially for young individuals and athletes exposed to high level sporting activities aiming to return to their preinjury level of activity. Cortical suspensory femoral fixation is commonly performed for graft fixation to the femur in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction using hamstring tendons. The aim of this study was to compare the clinical results of using fixed and adjustable loop cortical suspension devices in arthroscopic ACL reconstruction using the Lysholm Knee Scoring Scale after 12 months postoperatively. Material and methods. This study included a total of sixty patients who underwent transportal arthroscopic ACL reconstruction using a hamstring tendon autograft from November 2016 to December 2017. For femoral graft fixation, a fixed-length loop device was used in 30 patients (fixed-loop group) and an adjustable-length loop device was used in 30 patients (adjustable-loop group) randomly.For tibial graft fixation, interference screw was used for all patients. Results. The present study shows that there was no statistically significant difference between the two groups regarding the Lysholm score with highly statistically significant difference between preoperative and postoperative Lysholm score in each group separately. Conclusion. Both fixed loop and adjustable loop devices in ACL reconstruction provided good clinical outcomes but without significant statistical difference between both groups from the clinical point of view postoperatively using the Lysholm score.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document