scholarly journals Comparative Study on the Effectiveness of Early or Delayed Weight-Bearing After Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction

2016 ◽  
Vol 62 (2) ◽  
pp. 234-238 ◽  
Author(s):  
Margit Hidi ◽  
Istvan Gergely ◽  
Tudor Sorin Pop ◽  
Octav Russu ◽  
Sandor Zuh ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Anterior Cruciate Ligament ◽  
Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction ◽  
Ligament Reconstruction ◽  
Cruciate Ligament ◽  
Weight Bearing ◽  
Joint Stability ◽  
Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Group Ii ◽  
Anterior Cruciate

AbstractObjectives. The aim of this study is to evaluate the efficacy of immediate weight-bearing versus two weeks delayed weight-bearing following anterior cruciate reconstruction.Methods. We conducted a prospective observational study on the efficiency of immediate or delayed weight-bearing following anterior cruciate reconstruction. 30 patients undergoing anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction were included in the study. The patients in the first group were allowed the maximum endurance level of weight-bearing on the operated leg from the first postoperative day, resuming normal walking as soon as possible. Patients in group II were barely allowed the loading of the affected limb after 2 weeks postoperatively. Patient assessment was performed preoperatively, immediately after the procedure and postoperatively at 6 weeks, 3 and 6 months.Results. The average pre- and postoperative values of the arthometric assessment show a statistically significant improvement of joint stability in both groups of patients. There were no significant differences in the development of joint mobility averages between the two groups. Following the evolution of functional test average values, there is a gradual function improvement in both groups of patients. The assessment results at 6 weeks and three months postoperatively shows that patients in the first group are significantly better in comparison with the results of patients in group II. The final evaluation showed no significant differences between the two groups of patients.Conclusions. The final assessment revealed no statistically significant difference in reported or objectively measured function. We believe that the weight-bearing exercises and the non–weight-bearing exercises are equally effective and safe in the post-ligamentoplasty recovery.

scholarly journals Is Remnant Preservation in Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction Superior to the Standard Technique? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

2019 ◽  
Vol 2019 ◽  
pp. 1-15 ◽  
Author(s):  
Han Wang ◽  
Ziming Liu ◽  
Yuwan Li ◽  
Yihang Peng ◽  
Wei Xu ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Anterior Cruciate Ligament ◽  
Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction ◽  
Ligament Reconstruction ◽  
Cruciate Ligament ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Anterior Cruciate ◽  
Postoperative Knee

Purpose. This is a systematic review and meta-analysis of current evidence that aims at comparing the clinical outcomes of remnant-preserving anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) and standard ACLR. Methods. A systematic review of randomized controlled studies and cohort studies comparing remnant-preserving ACLR with standard ACLR with a minimum level of evidence of II was performed. Studies were included by strict inclusion and exclusion criteria. Extracted data were summarized as preoperative conditions, postoperative clinical outcomes, and postoperative complications. When feasible, meta-analysis was performed with RevMan5.3 software. Study methodological quality was evaluated with the modified Coleman methodology score (CMS). Results. Eleven studies (n = 466 remnant-preserving and n = 536 standard) met the inclusion criteria. The mean modified CMS for all included studies was 85.8 (range: 77–92 on a 100-point scale). In total, 466 patients underwent remnant-preserving ACLR by 3 different procedures: standard ACLR plus tibial remnant tensioning (n = 283), selective-bundle augmentation (n = 49), and standard ACLR plus tibial remnant sparing (n = 134). Remnant-preserving ACLR provided a superior outcome of postoperative knee anterior stability (WMD = −0.42, 95% CI, −0.66, −0.17; P<0.01) and Lysholm score (WMD = 2.01, 95% CI, 0.53 to 3.50; P<0.01). There was no significant difference between the two groups with respect to second-look arthroscopy (OR = 1.38, 95% CI, 0.53, 3.62; P=0.51), complications (OR = 1.24 95% CI, 0.76, 2.02; P=0.39), International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) subject scores, IKDC grades, Lachman test, and pivot-shift test. Summary/conclusion. Remnant-preserving ACLR promotes similar graft synovial coverage and revascularization to standard ACLR. Equivalent or superior postoperative knee stability and clinical scores were observed for remnant-preserving ACLR compared with standard ACLR. No significant difference in the total complication rate between the groups was evident.

Excellent bone plug–socket integration at 8 weeks after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction using an adjustable-length loop cortical fixation device

2019 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
pp. 9-14
Author(s):  
Ryohei Uchida ◽  
Norimasa Nakamura ◽  
Tomoyuki Suzuki ◽  
Masashi Kusano ◽  
Tatsuo Mae ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Anterior Cruciate Ligament ◽  
Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction ◽  
Ligament Reconstruction ◽  
Cruciate Ligament ◽  
Interface Area ◽  
Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Bone Integration ◽  
Anterior Cruciate ◽  
Bone Plug

ObjectivesRecently, adjustable-length loop cortical fixation devices (ALCFDs) have been developed. However, they are not frequently used for bone–patellar tendon–bone (BTB) grafting, mainly because it is uncertain whether an ALCFD enables sufficient integration of the bone plug. Thus, the purpose of this study was to evaluate bone plug–socket integration in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACL-R) with an ALCFD.MethodsTwenty consecutive patients with a mean age of 25±10 years underwent primary anatomic rectangular tunnel (ART) ACL-R with a BTB graft using BTB TightRope. The operated knees were evaluated by CT at 4 weeks and 8 weeks postoperatively. Union between the bone plug and the socket wall were assessed on 30 evaluation planes. No border between the plug and the socket wall, or trabecular continuity, were defined as complete union and a visible gap of >1 mm as incomplete union. When complete union was observed on >20, 11–20, 5–10 or <5 of the evaluation planes, bone integration was graded as excellent, good, fair or poor, respectively. In addition, the interface area between the plug and the socket wall was assessed by CT value index. Clinical evaluation was performed at 2 years postoperatively using the International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) form.ResultsThe proportion of patients with excellent bone integration was 20% at 4 weeks and 85% at 8 weeks, showing a significant difference (p=0.00015). Moreover, the CT value index of the interface area at 4 weeks was 25.8%±11.8% and that at 8 weeks was 15.3%±9.0%, again showing a significant difference (p=0.005). These suggest that bone integration of the interface area progresses over time and adequate at 8 weeks. Clinically, all 16 patients examined directly were rated their knees as normal or nearly normal with a mean side-to-side difference in anterior laxity at manual maximum force by KT-2000 of 0.2±0.3 mm.ConclusionExcellent bone plug–socket integration was observed at 8 weeks after ART ACL-R using an ALCFD with satisfactory clinical results. An ALCFD could be safely applied for ART ACL-R.Level of evidence4 (case series).

Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction with and without a Ligament Augmentation Device

2002 ◽  
Vol 30 (6) ◽  
pp. 851-856 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jon Olav Drogset ◽  
Torbjørn Grøntvedt
Keyword(s):  
Anterior Cruciate Ligament ◽  
Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction ◽  
Ligament Reconstruction ◽  
Cruciate Ligament ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Long Term Effects ◽  
Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction ◽  
Ligament Augmentation ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Anterior Cruciate

Background Ligament augmentation devices have been used in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction since the suggestion of Kennedy et al. in 1980 that such devices would allow grafts to heal faster and more safely. Hypothesis Patients who had augmentation will have better outcomes after 8 years. Study Design Prospective randomized case control study. Methods Between 1991 and 1993, 100 patients were randomized to groups undergoing anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction with bone-patellar tendon-bone grafts with (49) or without (51) use of a Kennedy ligament augmentation device. Of these 100 patients, 94 were examined at an average of 8 years after surgery. Fifteen patients were excluded because of rupture in the other knee and 11 because of rerupture in the same knee. Results Of the remaining 68 patients, the mean Lysholm function score was 84 in the augmentation group and 87 in the control group. There was a statistically significant relationship between preoperatively detected cartilage injury and osteoarthritis. Almost half of the patients had developed osteoarthritis. We observed no significant difference between the two groups concerning rerupture rate, Lysholm or Lachman test scores, or KT-1000 arthrometer measurements. Conclusions We found no positive long-term effects supporting the use of augmentation in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document