Accessory Anteromedial Portal may not Provide Clinically Superior Results Compared with the Anteromedial Portal in Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction

AbstractTechniques using the anteromedial portal (AMP) and accessory anteromedial portal (AAMP) are commonly used in anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction. The aim of this study was to investigate the radiological and clinical outcomes of arthroscopic single-bundle ACL reconstruction using the AMP or AAMP technique to drill the femoral tunnel. The records of 157 patients who underwent single-bundle ACL reconstruction using the AMP or AAMP technique between 2011 and 2015 were reviewed. The femoral tunnel clock-face position and femoral tunnel and tibial tunnel anterior–posterior (AP) inclination angles were assessed on axial or AP magnetic resonance images. At last follow-up, the Lachman test and pivot-shift test were used to evaluate AP and rotational stability, respectively. The Lysholm knee scoring scale and the International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) form were used to evaluate clinical and functional results. No statistically significant differences were found between the groups in patient age, sex, follow-up period, or affected side distribution. The mean femoral tunnel inclination angle was 31.13 ± 8.06 degrees in the AMP group and 30.17 ± 9.02 degrees in the AAMP group (p = 0.513). The tibial tunnel inclination angle in the AMP group (16.28 ± 7.89 degrees) was not different from that in the AAMP group (13.70 ± 6.08 degrees). No significant differences were observed between the two groups in the Lachman test, pivot-shift test, Lysholm knee scoring scale, or IKDC scores. The AAMP technique was not clinically superior to the AMP technique in ACL reconstruction. This is a retrospective comparative study and its level of evidence is III.

Download Full-text

Computed tomographic evaluation of bone tunnel enlargement following single bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction with hamstring autograft

International Journal of Research in Orthopaedics ◽

10.18203/issn.2455-4510.intjresorthop20214967 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 8 (1) ◽

pp. 81

Author(s):

Sunil Chandrashekar ◽

Manjunath A. N. ◽

Shivakumar M. S.

Keyword(s):

Femoral Tunnel ◽

Cruciate Ligament ◽

Tibial Tunnel ◽

Single Bundle ◽

Knee Score ◽

Tunnel Enlargement ◽

Hamstring Autograft ◽

Tunnel Diameter ◽

Anterior Cruciate

The purpose of this study is to evaluate tibial and femoral tunnel diameter following single bundle anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction and correlation between tunnel enlargement and clinical outcome. Twelve patients who underwent primary arthroscopic single bundle ACL reconstruction with hamstring graft were included in prospective case series. Preoperative clinical evaluation was performed using international knee documentation committee (IKDC) subjective score and grade, Tegner knee score and Lysholm knee score. Computed tomography (CT) evaluation of the femoral and tibial tunnels were done on post-operative day (POD) 1 and at a mean follow up of 9 months (range 7-12 months) and were compared with functional scores. Our study shows significant tibial and femoral tunnel enlargement on CT scan at 9 months (range 7-12 months) postoperatively. All the clinical evaluation scales showed improvement postoperatively. The mean average femoral tunnel diameter increased significantly (p<0.001) from 8.17±0.57 to 9.08±0.660 (10%) and tibial tunnel diameter increased significantly (p<0.001) from 8.08±0.669 to 9.07±0.601 (11%) postoperatively at a mean follow up of 9 months (range 7-12 months). No statistically significant difference between tunnel enlargement and clinical values were found. In our current prospective CT based study, we conclude use of extracortical fixation of femoral tunnel with stronger fixation of the tibial tunnel, tunnel orientation and anatomic fixation close to the joint line along with less aggressive rehabilitation protocol with use of extension knee brace may result in minimization of tunnel widening with quadrupled hamstring autograft.

Download Full-text

Arthroscopic Reconstruction of Anterior Cruciate Ligaments With Allograft: Single-tunnel Double-bundle Versus Single-tunnel Single-bundle

10.21203/rs.3.rs-44919/v1 ◽

2020 ◽

Author(s):

Weimin Zhu ◽

Yuanhui Zhou ◽

Kang Chen ◽

Yizi Zheng ◽

Wei Lu ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Knee Joint ◽

Acl Reconstruction ◽

Pivot Shift ◽

Double Bundle ◽

Pivot Shift Test ◽

Single Bundle ◽

Arthroscopic Reconstruction ◽

Anterior Cruciate ◽

The Stability

Abstract Purpose Arthroscopic reconstruction of anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) commonly adopted single-tunnel single-bundle (STSB) or double-tunnel double-bundle (DTDB) methods. Though single-tunnel double-bundle (STDB) has been used in clinical practice, the efficacy remains unclear. The objective of this study is to compare the clinical results of ACL reconstruction using the STDB and STSB techniques. Methods Between March 2010 to June 2013, 78 patients with ACL rupture underwent arthroscopic STDB reconstruction (42 cases) or STSB reconstruction (36 cases) using anterior tibialis tendon allografts in our department. IKDC, Lysholm and Tegner scores were used to evaluate the subjective function of the knee joint during the postoperative follow-up. In addition, the Lachman test and pivot shift test were used to objectively assess the stability of the knee. Results The average follow-up time is 24.2 ± 5.7 months in the STDB group, and 24.8 ± 6.6 months in the STSB group. Patients in both groups recovered to preoperative sports level with few complications. The postoperative Lysholm, IKDC, Tegner scores, and knee joint stability were significantly improved compared to preoperative status in both groups (P < 0.05). However, no statistically significant difference was observed between the two groups at the final follow-up (P > 0.05), except for the improvement of pivot shift test positive rate in the STDB group compared with STSB group (P < 0.05). Conclusion Both techniques can be used to restore the stability and function of the knee joint with satisfactory short-term efficacy, and STDB showed better rotational stability than STSB technique, indicating the STDB technique may also considered a reliable method for ACL reconstruction.

Download Full-text

Single-Bundle versus Double-Bundle Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: A Prospective Randomized Controlled Trial with 6-Year Follow-up

The Journal of Knee Surgery ◽

10.1055/s-0037-1598176 ◽

2017 ◽

Vol 30 (09) ◽

pp. 898-904 ◽

Cited By ~ 10

Author(s):

Francesco Dini ◽

Laura de Girolamo ◽

Massimo Cattani ◽

Michele Rosa ◽

Paolo Adravanti

Keyword(s):

Anterior Cruciate Ligament ◽

Acl Reconstruction ◽

Femoral Tunnel ◽

Cruciate Ligament ◽

Double Bundle ◽

Lysholm Score ◽

Single Bundle ◽

Randomized Controlled ◽

Anterior Cruciate

AbstractSingle-bundle (SB) anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction is increasingly used in a large number of patients and it allows obtaining very good clinical and subjective results; however, functional tests show a persistent rotational instability. Biomechanical studies seem to indicate that double-bundle (DB) ACL reconstruction allows to obtain increased anterior and rotational stability compared with SB. The aim of this prospective randomized controlled study was to compare the clinical outcome and the possible osteoarthritic evolution of patients treated either with a SB (freehand transtibial femoral tunnel) or with a DB technique (outside-in for posterolateral femoral tunnel/inside-out for anteromedial femoral tunnel) at a final follow-up of 6 years. A total of 60 patients with complete ACL rupture (age, 16–40 years) were prospectively randomized to SB (n = 30) or DB (n = 30) groups. Patients were evaluated preoperatively and after surgery at 6 months, 1, 3, and 6 years with Lysholm score, International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) form, and KT-2000 (Medmetric Corp). The degree of osteoarthritis (OA) based on the Kellgren–Lawrence grade was also assessed. No significant differences in background factors between the two groups were observed. Homogeneity was also found in term of preoperative Lysholm score, IKDC, and KT-2000 between SB and DB groups. After 6 months from surgery, both groups showed significant improvements for Lysholm, IKDC, and KT-2000 score with respect to preoperative observations (p < 0.001); however, no significant differences have been observed in term of postoperative values between SB and DB groups at each time point (6-year evaluation: Lysholm score 98.14 ± 10.03 and 97.22 ± 12.82; IKDC normal + nearly normal 95 and 100%; KT-2000 1.68 ± 1.26 and 1.03 ± 1.92 for SB and DB, respectively; all p > 0.05). At the final follow-up, three patients (11.11%) in the DB group and two patients (7.69%) in the SB group presented signs of OA progression. Our study did not reveal any advantages in using DB ACL reconstruction in mid- to long-term follow-up in term of clinical outcome and knee stability, as well as in term of OA progression.

Download Full-text

Systematic Review of Surgical Technique and Tunnel Target Points and Placement in Anatomical Single-Bundle ACL Reconstruction

The Journal of Knee Surgery ◽

10.1055/s-0040-1710521 ◽

2020 ◽

Author(s):

Takanori Iriuchishima ◽

Bunsei Goto

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Surgical Technique ◽

Acl Reconstruction ◽

Femoral Tunnel ◽

Cruciate Ligament ◽

Tibial Tunnel ◽

Target Point ◽

Single Bundle ◽

Anterior Cruciate ◽

Transportal Technique

AbstractThe purpose of this systematic review was to reveal the trend in surgical technique and tunnel targets points and placement in anatomical single-bundle anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction. Following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) statement, data collection was performed. PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochran Review were searched using the terms “anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction,” “anatomic or anatomical,” and “single bundle.” Studies were included when they reported clinical results, surgical technique, and/or tunnel placement evaluation. Laboratory studies, technical reports, case reports, and reviews were excluded from this study. From these full article reviews, graft selection, method of creating the femoral tunnel, and femoral and tibial tunnel target points and placement were evaluated. In the 79 studies included for data evaluation, the selected grafts were: bone patella tendon bone autograft (12%), and hamstring autograft (83%). The reported methods of creating the femoral tunnel were: transportal technique (54%), outside-in technique (15%), and transtibial technique (19%). In the 60 studies reporting tunnel target points, the target point was the center of the femoral footprint (60%), and the center of the anteromedial bundle footprint (22%). In the 23 studies evaluating tunnel placement, the femoral tunnel was placed in a shallow–deep direction (32.3%) and in a high–low direction (30.2%), and the tibial tunnel was placed from the anterior margin of the tibia (38.1%). The results of this systematic review revealed a trend in anatomical single-bundle ACL reconstruction favoring a hamstring tendon with a transportal technique, and a tunnel target point mainly at the center of the ACL footprint. The level of evidence stated is Systematic review of level-III studies.

Download Full-text

Arthroscopic reconstruction of anterior cruciate ligaments with allograft: Single-tunnel double-bundle versus single-tunnel single-bundle

10.21203/rs.3.rs-147572/v1 ◽

2021 ◽

Author(s):

Weimin Zhu ◽

Yizi Zheng ◽

Wei Lu ◽

Jianyi Xiong ◽

Daping Wang ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Knee Joint ◽

Acl Reconstruction ◽

Pivot Shift ◽

Double Bundle ◽

Pivot Shift Test ◽

Single Bundle ◽

Arthroscopic Reconstruction ◽

Anterior Cruciate ◽

The Stability

Abstract Background: Arthroscopic reconstruction of anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) commonly adopted single-tunnel single-bundle (STSB) or double-tunnel double-bundle (DTDB) methods. Though single-tunnel double-bundle (STDB) has been used in clinical practice, the efficacy remains unclear. The objective of this study is to compare the clinical results of ACL reconstruction using the STDB and STSB techniques.Methods: Between March 2010 to June 2013, 78 patients with ACL rupture underwent arthroscopic STDB reconstruction (42 cases) or STSB reconstruction (36 cases) using anterior tibialis tendon allografts in our department. IKDC, Lysholm and Tegner scores were used to evaluate the subjective function of the knee joint during the postoperative follow-up. In addition, the Lachman test and pivot shift test were used to objectively assess the stability of the knee.Results: The average follow-up time is 24.2±5.7 months in the STDB group, and 24.8±6.6 months in the STSB group. Patients in both groups recovered to preoperative sports level with few complications. The postoperative Lysholm, IKDC, Tegner scores, and knee joint stability were significantly improved compared to preoperative status in both groups (P<0.05). However, no statistically significant difference was observed between the two groups at the final follow-up (P>0.05), except for the improvement of pivot shift test positive rate in the STDB group compared with STSB group (P<0.05).Conclusion: Both techniques can be used to restore the stability and function of the knee joint with satisfactory short-term efficacy, and STDB showed better rotational stability than STSB technique, indicating the STDB technique may also considered a reliable method for ACL reconstruction.

Download Full-text

Comparison between functional outcome of arthroscopic anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction using single bundle six fold and four fold semitendinosus and gracilis graft

International Journal of Research in Orthopaedics ◽

10.18203/issn.2455-4510.intjresorthop20180441 ◽

2018 ◽

Vol 4 (2) ◽

pp. 220

Author(s):

Rahul G. Jaju ◽

Jeevan B. Tonde

Keyword(s):

Anterior Cruciate Ligament ◽

Functional Outcome ◽

Acl Reconstruction ◽

Pivot Shift ◽

Cruciate Ligament ◽

Pivot Shift Test ◽

Single Bundle ◽

Lachman Test ◽

Anterior Drawer Test ◽

Anterior Cruciate

Background: With increase participation in sports activities, anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) tear is a common and functionally disabling injury. Hamstring tendon as autografts for arthroscopic ACL reconstructions have shown good clinical and functional outcome in patients. The purpose of present study was to compare the functional outcome of arthroscopic Anterior Cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction using single bundle six fold and four fold ST and G graft.Methods: This was a prospective study conducted between period June 2008 to December 2010.181 patients undergoing ACL reconstruction were screened and 113 patients fulfilling the inclusion exclusion criteria were selected for the study.Results: All patients completed a minimum of 1 years follow up. In 4 fold group 27.50% were having grade 1 anterior drawer test 22.50% were having grade 1 Lachman test and 17.50% had grade 1 pivot shift test as compared to 6 fold group 6.66% had grade 1 anterior drawer test, 11.66% had grade 1 Lachman test, and 3.33% had grade 1 pivot shift test respectively which was statistically significant (p<0.05). Conclusions: Arthroscopic ACL reconstruction using six fold graft is effective modality of treatment in patient with ACL deficient knee. Six fold graft is thicker in diameter and cross sectional area as compared to four fold graft which occupies more surface area of normal ACL foot print and gives better stability of knee joint in both AP and rotational plane.

Download Full-text

All-Inside Single-Bundle Reconstruction of the Anterior Cruciate Ligament with the Anterior Half of the Peroneus Longus Tendon Compared to the Semitendinosus Tendon: A Two-Year Follow-Up Study

The Journal of Knee Surgery ◽

10.1055/s-0038-1627466 ◽

2018 ◽

Vol 31 (10) ◽

pp. 1022-1030 ◽

Cited By ~ 4

Author(s):

Mingguang Bi ◽

Chen Zhao ◽

Shuijun Zhang ◽

Bin Yao ◽

Zheping Hong ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Pivot Shift ◽

Cruciate Ligament ◽

Donor Site ◽

Pivot Shift Test ◽

Single Bundle ◽

Knee Stability ◽

Peroneus Longus Tendon ◽

Kt 1000 ◽

Anterior Cruciate

AbstractThe anterior half of the peroneus longus tendon (AHPLT) has been reported to be acceptable for ligament reconstruction with respect to strength and safety. However, there is little information regarding the clinical outcomes after using the AHPLT compared with other autograft tendons. A prospective randomized controlled study was performed to compare the results of 62 cases of all-inside anatomical single-bundle anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction using the AHPLT and 62 cases using semitendinosus graft with an average of 30.0 ± 3.6 months' follow-up. Tunnel placements of enrolled cases were measured on three-dimensional (3D) computed tomography (CT) and X-ray imaging. Knee stability was assessed using the anterior drawer test, pivot shift test, and KT-1000. The International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) 2000 subjective score was used to evaluate functional outcomes. The American Orthopedic Foot and Ankle Score (AOFAS) and the assessment of eversion muscle strength were performed to evaluate the function of the ankle donor site. Tunnel positions, which were confirmed with 3D CT, were in the anatomical positions. At the final follow-up, there were no significant differences between the semitendinosus group and the AHPLT group in the IKDC score (90.4 ± 7.1 vs. 89.3. ± 8.4), KT 1000 measurements (1.71 ± 0.57 vs. 1.85 ± 0.77), pivot shift test, and Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) (0.15 ± 0.36 vs. 0.10 ± 0.30). No obvious ankle site complications were found at 24 months. The average AOFAS score of the AHPLT group was comparable to that of the semitendinosus tendon group (99.1 ± 1.40 vs. 99.5 ± 1.21). There was no significant difference in clinical outcomes or knee stability between the semitendinosus group and the AHPLT group at the 2-year follow-up. An AHPLT autograft may be a good alternative for all-inside ACL reconstruction with respect to its strength, safety, and donor site morbidity.

Download Full-text

Surgical intra- and extra-articular anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a meta-analysis

10.21203/rs.2.20069/v1 ◽

2020 ◽

Author(s):

Xiangyun Cheng ◽

Fanxiao Liu ◽

Dongsheng Zhou ◽

Alexander C. Paulus

Keyword(s):

Anterior Cruciate Ligament ◽

Acl Reconstruction ◽

Pivot Shift ◽

Cruciate Ligament ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Cochrane Library ◽

Pivot Shift Test ◽

Reconstruction Technique ◽

Anterior Cruciate

Abstract Background: It is still controversial whether the combination of anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction and extra-articular reconstruction (EAR) have good clinical efficacy. This meta-analysis aims to compare the clinical effectiveness of ACL reconstruction and combined reconstruction. Methods: Electronic databases, including Medline/PubMed, Embase and the Cochrane Library, were systematically searched to identify targeted studies. A meta-analysis aims to pool the outcome estimates of interest, such as the Lysholm, International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) and Tegner scores and the results from the KT-1000/2000 arthrometer test, the Lachman test and the pivot shift test. Results : Twelve studies involving 1146 knees were identified. Compared with single ACL reconstruction, combined reconstruction had better results for a pivot shift of grade 1 (relative ratio [RR] = 0.88, 95% CI: 0.83-0.94) and grade 2 (RR = 0.95, 95% CI: 0.91-0.99) rather than grade 3 (RR = 0.98, 95% CI: 0.90-1.06) and no statistically significant difference for both Lachman grade 1 (RR = 0.96, 95% CI: 0.89-1.05) and grade 2 (RR = 0.96, 95% CI: 0.90-1.03). Combined reconstruction resulted in significant improvements on the instrumented joint laxity test when considering a failure standard of more than 5 mm (a side-to-side arthrometric difference) (RR = 0.94, 95% CI: 0.89-0.98) rather than 3 mm (RR = 0.94, 95% CI: 0.86-1.03). Moreover, combined reconstruction increased the IKDC score at the 12-month (weighted mean difference [WMD] = -6.38, 95% CI: -9.66 to -3.10), 24-month (WMD = -5.60, 95% CI: -8.54 to -2.66) and 36-month follow-ups (WMD = -4.71, 95% CI: -7.59 to -1.83) and the Tegner score at the 36-month follow-up (WMD = -0.53, 95% CI: -0.97 to -0.09), but it did not increase the Lysholm score at the 36-month follow-up (WMD = -0.84, 95% CI: -2.02 to 0.34). Conclusion : With the advances in reconstruction techniques, combined reconstructions were found to be effective in improving rotational stability and to lead to good functional scores. However, obviously, the combined reconstruction technique is more time-consuming and requires an additional incision, which is not suitable for all ACL-deficient patients. Therefore, programs should be personalized and customized for the specific situation of each patient.

Download Full-text

Arthroscopic reconstruction of anterior cruciate ligaments with allograft: Single-tunnel double-bundle versus single-tunnel single-bundle

10.21203/rs.3.rs-44919/v2 ◽

2020 ◽

Author(s):

Weimin Zhu ◽

Yuanhui Zhou ◽

Kang Chen ◽

Yizi Zheng ◽

Wei Lu ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Knee Joint ◽

Acl Reconstruction ◽

Pivot Shift ◽

Double Bundle ◽

Pivot Shift Test ◽

Single Bundle ◽

Arthroscopic Reconstruction ◽

Anterior Cruciate ◽

The Stability

Abstract Purpose: Arthroscopic reconstruction of anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) commonly adopted single-tunnel single-bundle (STSB) or double-tunnel double-bundle (DTDB) methods. Though single-tunnel double-bundle (STDB) has been used in clinical practice, the efficacy remains unclear. The objective of this study is to compare the clinical results of ACL reconstruction using the STDB and STSB techniques.Methods: Between March 2010 to June 2013, 78 patients with ACL rupture underwent arthroscopic STDB reconstruction (42 cases) or STSB reconstruction (36 cases) using anterior tibialis tendon allografts in our department. IKDC, Lysholm and Tegner scores were used to evaluate the subjective function of the knee joint during the postoperative follow-up. In addition, the Lachman test and pivot shift test were used to objectively assess the stability of the knee.Results: The average follow-up time is 24.2±5.7 months in the STDB group, and 24.8±6.6 months in the STSB group. Patients in both groups recovered to preoperative sports level with few complications. The postoperative Lysholm, IKDC, Tegner scores, and knee joint stability were significantly improved compared to preoperative status in both groups (P<0.05). However, no statistically significant difference was observed between the two groups at the final follow-up (P>0.05), except for the improvement of pivot shift test positive rate in the STDB group compared with STSB group (P<0.05).Conclusion: Both techniques can be used to restore the stability and function of the knee joint with satisfactory short-term efficacy, and STDB showed better rotational stability than STSB technique, indicating the STDB technique may also considered a reliable method for ACL reconstruction.

Download Full-text

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

Journal of Experimental Orthopaedics ◽

10.1186/s40634-020-00292-0 ◽

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.

Download Full-text