scholarly journals Does Donor Age of Nonirradiated Achilles Tendon Allograft Influence Mid-Term Results of Revision ACL Reconstruction?

Joints ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 06 (01) ◽  
pp. 010-015 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stefano Zaffagnini ◽  
Tommaso Roberti di Sarsina ◽  
Tommaso Bonanzinga ◽  
Marco Nitri ◽  
Luca Macchiarola ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Achilles Tendon ◽  
Acl Reconstruction ◽  
Lysholm Score ◽  
Inclusion Criteria ◽  
Donor Age ◽  
Revision Acl Reconstruction ◽  
Tendon Allograft ◽  
Achilles Tendon Allograft ◽  
Mid Term Results

Purpose The purpose of the present study was to investigate if the donor age of nonirradiated Achilles tendon allograft could influence the clinical results of revision anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction. Methods All patients that underwent ACL revision between 2004 and 2008 with at least 4 years of follow-up were included. For all the patients that met the inclusion criteria, the age of the graft donor was obtained from the tissue bank. Lysholm score was administered to patients that met inclusion criteria. In addition, patients were divided in two groups based on the donor age (<45 years vs. ≥45 years), and the baseline characteristics and outcomes were compared. Results Fifty-two patients were evaluated at a mean 4.8 ± 0.8 years follow-up with Lysholm score. The Lysholm significantly improved from 62.3 ± 6.6 at preoperative status to 84.4 ± 12.3 at final follow-up. The mean donor age was 48.7 ± 8.4 years; a significant difference in Lysholm score was noted between patients that received an allograft with a donor age <45 years (14 patients; 27%) and those receiving an allograft with a donor age ≥45 years (38; 73%) (89.5 ± 3.2 vs. 80.1 ± 11.1, respectively; p = 0.0469). The multiple regression model showed the donor age, the final follow-up, and the preoperative Lysholm score as significant predictors of postoperative Lysholm score (p < 0.0002). Conclusion Donor age of nonirradiated Achilles tendon allograft influenced the mid-term results of revision ACL reconstruction, thus advising the use of grafts from young donors. Level of Evidence Level III, retrospective comparative study.

Arthroscopic Posterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: The Achilles Tendon Allograft versus the Quadriceps Tendon Allograft

2019 ◽  
Vol 33 (06) ◽  
pp. 553-559 ◽  
Author(s):  
Seung Hoon Kang ◽  
Kang Min Sohn ◽  
Do Kyung Lee ◽  
Byung Hoon Lee ◽  
Seong Wook Yang ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Achilles Tendon ◽  
Cruciate Ligament ◽  
Preoperative Evaluation ◽  
Quadriceps Tendon ◽  
Lysholm Score ◽  
Pcl Reconstruction ◽  
Tendon Allograft ◽  
Subjective Score ◽  
Achilles Tendon Allograft

AbstractWe aimed to compare and analyze the outcomes of arthroscopic posterior cruciate ligament (PCL) reconstruction with the Achilles tendon allograft and the quadriceps tendon allograft. Twenty-nine patients who received the same procedure of arthroscopic PCL reconstruction within our inclusion criteria were reviewed retrospectively. There were 13 patients in the Achilles tendon allograft group and 16 patients in the quadriceps tendon allograft group. At least in 2 years of follow-up period, we evaluated the patients using the posterior drawer test, KT 2000 test, Lysholm knee scoring scale, Tegner activity scale score, International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) subjective knee form score, and Telos stress radiography. Between the two groups, no differences were found in preoperative patient demographic factors (age, gender, mean time of surgery, average follow-up period, cause of injury, and combined injury) (p > 0.05). Results of the posterior drawer test, KT 2000 test, Telos stress radiography, Lysholm score, Tegner activity score, and IKDC subjective score were not significantly different between the two groups at preoperative evaluation and after surgery (p > 0.05). On comparing preoperative evaluation and follow-up after surgery, the Achilles tendon allograft group showed significant improvement in the results of the KT 2000 test, Telos stress radiology, and Lysholm score, whereas the quadriceps tendon allograft group showed significant improvement in the results of the KT 2000 test, Telos stress radiology, Lysholm score, Tegner activity score, and IKDC subjective score (p < 0.05). The quadriceps tendon for arthroscopic PCL reconstruction is good alternative allograft for the Achilles tendon for arthroscopic PCL reconstruction. This is a retrospective comparative study.

scholarly journals Salvage of Failed Achilles Tendon Interposition Arthroplasty for DRUJ Instability After Ulnar Head Resection With Aptis Prosthesis

Hand ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 12 (5) ◽  
pp. 476-483
Author(s):  
Sunishka M. Wimalawansa ◽  
Rocio Rodriguez Lopez ◽  
Fernando Garcia de Lucas ◽  
Luc De Smet ◽  
Michael A. Boin ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Achilles Tendon ◽  
Recreational Sports ◽  
Interposition Arthroplasty ◽  
High Patient Satisfaction ◽  
Ulnar Head ◽  
Tendon Allograft ◽  
Biomechanical Features ◽  
Tendon Interposition ◽  
Achilles Tendon Allograft

Background: Historically, failed conservative treatment for irreparably damaged distal radioulnar joints (DRUJs) is treated via distal ulnar resection or DRUJ fusion; complications include disabling painful convergence of the radius and ulnar stump during lifting Various treatments for radioulnar impingement include distal radioulnar Achilles tendon allograft interpositional arthroplasty. This technique does not adequately prevent radioulnar impingement and we explore an alternative treatment. Methods: We report 7 adult patients who failed Achilles tendon interposition, subsequently treated with Aptis total DRUJ prostheses (mean follow-up, 26 months; range, 7-40). Results: Revision to Aptis prosthesis produced clinically stable DRUJ, improved grip strength and painless lifting capabilities, high patient satisfaction, and no major complications. All returned to daily activities and even recreational sports. Conclusions: Tendon lacks biomechanical features key to the shock-absorbing function of cartilage—features it cannot deliver when used to prevent radioulnar convergence. We report Aptis DRUJ prosthesis as an alternative to the tendon allograft technique.

scholarly journals Lower Failure Rates and Improved Patient Outcome Due to Reconstruction of the MCL and Revision ACL Reconstruction in Chronic Medial Knee Instability

2021 ◽  
Vol 9 (3) ◽  
pp. 232596712198931
Author(s):  
Lena Alm ◽  
Tobias Claus Drenck ◽  
Jannik Frings ◽  
Matthias Krause ◽  
Alexander Korthaus ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Acl Reconstruction ◽  
Lysholm Score ◽  
Knee Instability ◽  
Failure Rates ◽  
Medial Knee ◽  
Revision Acl Reconstruction ◽  
Risk Of Failure ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Patient Reported ◽  
Reconstruction Group

Background: Concomitant lesion of the medial collateral ligament (MCL) is associated with a greater risk of anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) graft failure. Purpose: The aim of this study was to compare two medial stabilization techniques in patients with revision ACL reconstruction (ACLR) and concomitant chronic medial knee instability. Study Design: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. Methods: In a retrospective study, we included 53 patients with revision ACLR and chronic grade 2 medial knee instability to compare medial surgical techniques (MCL reconstruction [n = 17] vs repair [n = 36]). Postoperative failure of the revision ACLR (primary aim) was defined as side-to-side difference in Rolimeter testing ≥5 mm or pivot-shift grade ≥2. Clinical parameters and postoperative functional scores (secondary aim) were evaluated with a mean ± SD follow-up of 28.8 ± 9 months (range, 24-69 months). Results: Revision ACLR was performed in 53 patients with additional grade 2 medial instability (men, n = 33; women, n = 20; mean age, 31.3 ± 12 years). Failure occurred in 5.9% (n = 1) in the MCL reconstruction group, whereas 36.1% (n = 13) of patients with MCL repair showed a failed revision ACLR ( P = .02). In the postoperative assessment, the anterior side-to-side difference in Rolimeter testing was significantly reduced (1.5 ± 1.9 mm vs 2.9 ± 2.3 mm; P = .037), and medial knee instability occurred significantly less (18% vs 50%; P = .025) in the MCL reconstruction group than in the MCL repair group. In the logistic regression, patients showed a 9-times elevated risk of failure when an MCL repair was performed ( P = .043). Patient-reported outcomes were increased in the MCL reconstruction group as compared with MCL repair, but only the Lysholm score showed a significant difference (Tegner, 5.6 ± 1.9 vs 5.3 ± 1.6; International Knee Documentation Committee, 80.3 ± 16.6 vs 73.6 ± 16.4; Lysholm, 82.9 ± 13.6 vs 75.1 ± 21.1 [ P = .047]). Conclusion: MCL reconstruction led to lower failure rates in patients with combined revision ACLR and chronic medial instability as compared with MCL repair. MCL reconstruction was superior to MCL repair, as lower postoperative anterior instability, an increased Lysholm score, and less medial instability were present after revision ACLR. MCL repair was associated with a 9-times greater risk of failure.

scholarly journals One-stage Revision ACL reconstruction with hamstring autograft results in satisfactory outcome

2017 ◽  
Vol 5 (5_suppl5) ◽  
pp. 2325967117S0017
Author(s):  
Ritwik Kejriwal ◽  
Jens Buelow
Keyword(s):  
Acl Reconstruction ◽  
Single Bundle ◽  
Significant Heterogeneity ◽  
Hamstring Autograft ◽  
Rupture Rate ◽  
One Stage ◽  
Revision Acl Reconstruction ◽  
Satisfactory Outcome ◽  
Kt 1000

Objectives: Revision anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction is associated with poorer outcomes and higher rerupture rates when compared to primary ACL reconstruction. There is also a significant heterogeneity in surgical technique, number of stages, and graft options. We report a large single surgeon case series with hamstring autograft as a graft option. Methods: Observational series of revision ACL reconstructions performed by the senior author between 2005 and 2015 was carried out. Chart reviews and clinic follow-ups were performed with the following recorded – re-rupture rate, radiographic grading of osteoarthritis, KT-1000 arthrometer test, IKDC outcome scores and knee range of motion. All patients underwent single bundle four-strand hamstring autograft performed in one stage with use of new tunnels in majority of the cases. Results: 66 patients underwent hamstring autograft one-stage revision ACL reconstruction by Dr Jens Buelow. Chart review was carried out on all patients, and 26 (39%) were followed up in clinic and/or by phone with a mean follow up of 4.7 years. Outcomes included re-rupture rate of 4.5%, reoperation rate of 12%, mean visual analogue scale score of 7.6, mean side-to-side difference of 2.6 mm for KT-1000 arthrometer test, and mean IKDC score of 79. Of the 17 patients with radiographs, 40% had moderate osteoarthritis (grade 2 or 3) at follow-up. Conclusion: Revision ACL reconstruction can result in a satisfactory outcome when performed with a hamstring autograft in one stage.

scholarly journals Preliminary Results in Anatomic All-inside Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction

2016 ◽  
Vol 1 (s2) ◽  
pp. 23-26
Author(s):  
Octav Russu ◽  
Tiberiu Bățagă ◽  
Andrei-Marian Feier ◽  
Radu Prejbeanu ◽  
Radu Fleaca ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Anterior Cruciate Ligament ◽  
Acl Reconstruction ◽  
Cruciate Ligament ◽  
Knee Laxity ◽  
Clinical Results ◽  
Lysholm Score ◽  
X Rays ◽  
The Mean ◽  
Anterior Cruciate

Abstract Introduction: Anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) rupture is one of the most common lesions in knee traumatology; therefore the number of ACL reconstructions is increasing worldwide. Usually, an anteromedial (AM) accessory portal is required in anatomical positioning of the femoral tunnel, which is not absolutely necessary in this technique. Aim: Assessment of all-inside ACL reconstruction preliminary clinical results with adjustable loops and buttons on both femoral and tibial surfaces. Method: Our prospective study included 28 subjects (19 male, 9 female) with chronic ACL ruptures. The mean age of the study population was 27.72 ± 8.23 years. In all cases ACL reconstruction was carried out with the use of quadrupled semitendinosus auto-grafts with adjustable loops and buttons on the femoral and tibial surfaces and anatomic placement of both tunnels, using an outside-in technique, with flipcutters (Arthrex®). Clinical and radiological evaluations were carried out before surgery and at 3 and 6 months postoperatively, with the Lysholm scoring system, the Tegner activity scale and anterior-posterior and latero-lateral X-rays. Anterior knee laxity was measured in 25° of flexion using a portable arthrometer (RolimeterTM, Aircast®) and maximum manual force. Results: During the final follow-up, the Lysholm score was good and excellent in 27 cases, with a mean Lysholm score of 95.55 ± 4.63; all results were classified as good. The mean preoperative Tegner activity score was 3.46 ± 1.71 (range: 1-7), and the post-operative mean score was 5.75 ± 2.24 (range: 2-10). We found no graft ruptures. Preoperative knee laxity measurements showed a mean displacement of 11.5 ± 3.1 mm and side-to-side differences of 5.6 ± 3.5 mm, while the postoperative measurements at the last follow-up were 6.3 ± 1.54 mm and 2.65 ± 1.86 mm, respectively. Conclusion: Short-term clinical outcomes of all-inside ACL restoration with anatomic placement femoral and tibial tunnels seem to recommend this surgical option, with good subjective and objective results. Additional research will have to prove the long-term success.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document