Literature DB >> 11973544

[Anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: patellar tendon autograft versus four-strand hamstring tendon autografts. A comparative study at one year follow-up].

M Katabi1, P Djian, P Christel.   

Abstract

PURPOSE OF THE STUDY: The purpose of our study was to compare outcome at one year after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction for chronic laxity using the patellar tendon autograft or four-strand hamstring tendon autografts. MATERIAL AND
METHOD: This non-randomized study included 129 consecutive patients operated on between October 1996 and September 1998. Ninety patients were available for assessment at one year: 50 in the patellar tendon group and 40 in the hamstring tendon group. The two groups were comparable for all criteria except sex. A single operator assessed all patients using the IKDC 93 chart. Laxity was measured by comparison with the healthy knee using the KT1000 at maximal manual tension. Preoperative laxity was 8.0 +/- 3.0 mm in the patellar tendon group and 7.6 +/- 3.0 in the hamstring tendon group. All ligamentoplasties were performed arthroscopically using a blind femoral tunnel. The patellar tendon was fixed with two metallic interference screws and the four-strand hamstring autografts with two different methods: an RCI(R) interference screw or a cortical system associating a femoral Endobutton(R) and tibial fixation with a bicortical tibial screw. Lateral tendonesis was performed with the fascia lata in 60% of the patients in the patellar tendon group and in 45% of those in the hamstring tendon group. Rehabilitation exercises were initiated early and were the same in the two groups.
RESULTS: Overall results were satisfactory in more than 80% of the patients in both groups. The final IKDC score was significantly better in the patellar tendon group and subjective patient satisfaction was better in the hamstrings group. Residual pain was significantly less pronounced in the hamstrings tendon group (p=0.004). Laxity was improved significantly better in the patellar tendon group: average residual laxity=2.7 +/- 2.1 mm versus 4.5 +/- 2.8 mm (p=0.03) in the hamstrings tendon group; hard stop at the Lachman test in 96% of the patellar tendon group and 78% in the hamstrings tendon group (p=0.007). Residual laxity was significantly less pronounced in the women in the patellar tendon group. There was no significant difference in laxity by type of fixation in the hamstrings tendon group. Recovery in terms of level of activity and type of sport was the same in the two groups. DISCUSSION: These two surgical techniques provide good functional outcome at one year with better control of laxity with patellar tendon autografts and better relief of pain with four-strand hamstrings autografts. Longer follow-up would be useful to assess laxity long after hamstring reconstruction. We compared the type of transplant and the fixation method together as a single unity, but progress in four-strand hamstring autograft fixation will certainly allow even more optimal results and improved correction of laxity. In our opinion, the patellar tendon autograft remains the gold standard for high-performance athletes practicing a contact-pivot sport, but both types of ACL reconstruction are most useful. We select patients for four-strand hamstring tendon reconstruction as a function of age, sex, and type of sports activities.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2002        PMID: 11973544

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Rev Chir Orthop Reparatrice Appar Mot        ISSN: 0035-1040


  5 in total

1.  Double-bundle bone-patellar tendon-bone and gracilis in ACL reconstruction.

Authors:  David Dejour; Paolo Ferrua; Nicolas Bonin; Paulo Renato Fernandes Saggin
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2012-01-11       Impact factor: 4.342

2.  Electromyographic analysis of the knee using fixed-activation threshold after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction.

Authors:  Mario Kasović; Mladen Mejovšek; Branka Matković; Saša Janković; Anton Tudor
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2010-06-06       Impact factor: 3.075

3.  New intraoperative protocol for kinematic evaluation of ACL reconstruction: preliminary results.

Authors:  S Zaffagnini; S Bignozzi; S Martelli; N Imakiire; N Lopomo; M Marcacci
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2006-05-04       Impact factor: 4.342

4.  Pain Assessment After Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: Bone-Patellar Tendon-Bone Versus Hamstring Tendon Autograft.

Authors:  Kelechi R Okoroha; Robert A Keller; Edward K Jung; Lafi Khalil; Nathan Marshall; Patricia A Kolowich; Vasilios Moutzouros
Journal:  Orthop J Sports Med       Date:  2016-12-20

5.  [Ligamentoplasty of the anterior cruciate ligament of the knee-joint in the athlete: retrospective study of 80 cases conducted in the Department of Orthopaedics in Tataouine, Tunisia].

Authors:  Mourad Hammami; Nizar Sahnoun
Journal:  Pan Afr Med J       Date:  2020-05-04
  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.