Literature DB >> 18490472

Prospective clinical comparisons of anatomic double-bundle versus single-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction procedures in 328 consecutive patients.

Eiji Kondo1, Kazunori Yasuda, Hirotaka Azuma, Yoshie Tanabe, Tomonori Yagi.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Several trials have been conducted to compare the clinical results between anatomic double-bundle and single-bundle anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction procedures. In these studies, however, the number of patients was insufficient to compare the clinical results of the 2 procedures. HYPOTHESIS: The anatomic double-bundle procedure may be significantly better concerning the anterior laxity and the pivot-shift test than the single-bundle procedure, while there may be no significant differences in the other clinical evaluations and the intra-operative and postoperative complications between the 2 procedures. STUDY
DESIGN: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 2.
METHODS: Three hundred and twenty-eight patients with unilateral ACL reconstruction using hamstring autografts were divided into 2 groups. The first 157 consecutive patients underwent single-bundle reconstruction and the remaining 171 patients underwent anatomic double-bundle reconstruction. Concerning all background factors, there were no statistical differences between the 2 groups. Each patient was examined 2 years after surgery.
RESULTS: No serious complications were experienced in either group. The anterior laxity was significantly less in the double-bundle reconstruction (mean, 1.2 mm) than in the single-bundle reconstruction (mean, 2.5 mm). In the pivot-shift test, the double bundle (+ indication, 16%; ++, 3%) was significantly better than the single bundle (+ result, 37%; ++, 12%). The mean Lysholm score averaged 96.5 points and 97.3 points in single-bundle and double-bundle reconstructions, respectively, while the International Knee Documentation Committee evaluation showed that 90 and 110 patients, respectively, were evaluated as rank A (no significant difference between groups). There were no significant differences in the other clinical evaluations and the complications between the 2 procedures.
CONCLUSIONS: The postoperative anterior and rotational stability after the anatomic double-bundle ACL reconstruction was significantly better than that after the single-bundle reconstruction, although there were no significant differences between the 2 procedures concerning the complications and the clinical evaluations.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18490472     DOI: 10.1177/0363546508317123

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am J Sports Med        ISSN: 0363-5465            Impact factor:   6.202


  106 in total

1.  Rotatory laxity evaluation of the knee using modified Slocum's test in open magnetic resonance imaging.

Authors:  Ken Okazaki; Yasutaka Tashiro; Toshiaki Izawa; Shuichi Matsuda; Yukihide Iwamoto
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2011-12-31       Impact factor: 4.342

Review 2.  Pivot shift as an outcome measure for ACL reconstruction: a systematic review.

Authors:  Olufemi R Ayeni; Manraj Chahal; Michael N Tran; Sheila Sprague
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2012-01-05       Impact factor: 4.342

3.  Size comparison of ACL footprint and reconstructed auto graft.

Authors:  Takanori Iriuchishima; Kenji Shirakura; Hiroshi Yorifuji; Shin Aizawa; Freddie H Fu
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2012-03-10       Impact factor: 4.342

4.  The anatomic approach to primary, revision and augmentation anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction.

Authors:  Carola F van Eck; Verena M Schreiber; T Thomas Liu; Freddie H Fu
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2010-06-09       Impact factor: 4.342

5.  MRI of double-bundle ACL reconstruction: evaluation of graft findings.

Authors:  Tommi Kiekara; Timo Järvelä; Heini Huhtala; Antti Paakkala
Journal:  Skeletal Radiol       Date:  2011-09-30       Impact factor: 2.199

6.  The correlation of femoral tunnel length with the height and area of the lateral wall of the femoral intercondylar notch in anatomical single-bundle ACL reconstruction.

Authors:  Takanori Iriuchishima; Keinosuke Ryu; Makoto Suruga; Shin Aizawa; Freddie H Fu
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2016-02-04       Impact factor: 4.342

7.  Single-bundle versus double-bundle ACL reconstructions in isolation and in conjunction with extra-articular iliotibial band tenodesis.

Authors:  Paul D Butler; Chloe J Mellecker; M James Rudert; John P Albright
Journal:  Iowa Orthop J       Date:  2013

8.  Analysis of the graft bending angle at the femoral tunnel aperture in anatomic double bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a comparison of the transtibial and the far anteromedial portal technique.

Authors:  Koji Nishimoto; Ryosuke Kuroda; Kiyonori Mizuno; Yuichi Hoshino; Kouki Nagamune; Seiji Kubo; Masayoshi Yagi; Motoi Yamaguchi; Shinichi Yoshiya; Masahiro Kurosaka
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2008-12-02       Impact factor: 4.342

9.  One-stage anatomic double-bundle anterior and posterior cruciate ligament reconstruction using the autogenous hamstring tendons.

Authors:  Kazunori Yasuda; Nobuto Kitamura; Eiji Kondo; Riku Hayashi; Masayuki Inoue
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2009-04-28       Impact factor: 4.342

10.  Anatomic double-bundle versus single-bundle ACL reconstruction: a comparative biomechanical study in rabbits.

Authors:  Vassilios S Nikolaou; Nicolas Efstathopoulos; Ioannis Sourlas; Anastasia Pilichou; Georgios Papachristou
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2009-03-17       Impact factor: 4.342

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.