Literature DB >> 10232033

[Considerations for the indications for anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Results of conservative versus operative treatment].

P Diekstall1, F Rauhut.   

Abstract

Medium-term results with a follow-up of at least 3 years were done in 160 patients (average follow up 51 months) after ACL reconstruction using IKDC evaluation form and Noyes score and in 110 patients (average follow Up 53 months) after non-operative management. Unlike objective good parameters the subjective assessment of knee function according to the Noyes score reveals significantly worse results in cases with ACL reconstruction compared to the knees without surgery. The best functional results we found in professional athletes after ACL reconstruction. Comparable positive results of knee function is only achieved in approx. 15% of the patients from the natural history group, who can maintain high risk pivoting activity level feeling no giving way. In our opinion compensatory proprioceptive mechanism account for the surpassing results in these two groups of patients. It will be postulated that it is not the absolute power of the hamstring but the latency period of recruition that influences the compensation of anterior knee instability. We have modified our rehabilitation methods in order to improve proprioception and dynamic stability of the ACL-deficient knee. Based on our results we primarily limitate the ACL reconstruction on a group of patients practicing high-risk-pivoting sports. Only when menisceal lesions appear or patients suffer from giving way episodes we support secondary surgery. The pivot shift sign is reflecting the dynamic aspect of knee instability. In our opinion it is the decisive parameter to assess knee instability unless there are useful technical procedures.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1999        PMID: 10232033     DOI: 10.1007/s001130050390

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Unfallchirurg        ISSN: 0177-5537            Impact factor:   1.000


  4 in total

1.  Is ACL reconstruction only for athletes? A study of the incidence of meniscal and cartilage injuries in an ACL-deficient athlete and non-athlete population: an Indian experience.

Authors:  Clement Joseph; Shirish S Pathak; M Aravinda; David Rajan
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2006-10-11       Impact factor: 3.075

Review 2.  Reconstruction versus conservative treatment after rupture of the anterior cruciate ligament: cost effectiveness analysis.

Authors:  Mazda Farshad; Christian Gerber; Dominik C Meyer; Alexander Schwab; Patricia R Blank; Thomas Szucs
Journal:  BMC Health Serv Res       Date:  2011-11-19       Impact factor: 2.655

3.  A noninvasive biomechanical treatment as an additional tool in the rehabilitation of an acute anterior cruciate ligament tear: A case report.

Authors:  Avi Elbaz; Marc S Cohen; Eytan M Debbi; Udi Rath; Amit Mor; Guy Morag; Yiftah Beer; Ganit Segal; Ronen Debi
Journal:  SAGE Open Med Case Rep       Date:  2014-01-08

4.  Why do patients undergoing anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction in Brazil stay in hospital for longer periods than in other countries? Prospective evaluation of 30 patients and presentation of possible discharge criteria.

Authors:  Diego Costa Astur; Pedro Gabriel Riboli Navarro; Lucas Furtado Fonseca; Gustavo Gonçalves Arliani; Vinicius Aleluia; Ciro Veronese; Camila Cohen Kaleka; Moisés Cohen
Journal:  Rev Bras Ortop       Date:  2013-09-27
  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.