Literature DB >> 19188561

A prospective comparison of 3 hamstring ACL fixation devices--Rigidfix, BioScrew, and Intrafix--randomized into 4 groups with 2 years of follow-up.

Arsi Harilainen1, Jerker Sandelin.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: New devices for graft fixation in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction are released to clinical use without clinical follow-up data. HYPOTHESIS: There is similar clinical outcome after either cross-pin or absorbable interference screw fixation in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction with hamstring tendons. STUDY
DESIGN: Randomized controlled clinical trial; Level of evidence, 1.
METHODS: A total of 120 patients were randomized into 4 different groups (30 each) for anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction with hamstring tendons: femoral Rigidfix cross-pin and Intrafix tibial expansion sheath with a tapered expansion screw; Rigidfix femoral and BioScrew interference screw tibial fixation, BioScrew femoral and Intrafix tibial fixation; or BioScrew fixation into both tunnels. The evaluation methods were clinical examination, knee scores, and instrumented laxity measurements.
RESULTS: Ten patients were completely lost to follow-up and 3 revisions were done before the 2-year follow-up, leaving 107 of 120 (89%) patients for analysis. No statistically significant differences between the groups were seen 2 years postoperatively, and all but 2 patients in the Rigidfix/Intrafix and Rigidfix/BioScrew groups, respectively, were classified into International Knee Documentation Committee A or B categories. A revision reconstruction was performed before the 2-year follow-up in 2 cases after a high-energy injury caused a rerupture (1 in Rigidfix/Intrafix and 1 in BioScrew/BioScrew groups). In addition, there were 4 nontraumatic failures revised before the 2-year follow-up (2 in Rigidfix/Intrafix and 1 each in Rigidfix/BioScrew and BioScrew/BioScrew).
CONCLUSION: There were no statistically or clinically relevant differences in the results 2 years postoperatively, and all 4 techniques improved patient performance.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19188561     DOI: 10.1177/0363546508328109

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


  23 in total

Review 1.  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

2.  What is the best femoral fixation of hamstring autografts in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction?: a meta-analysis.

Authors:  Alexis Colvin; Charu Sharma; Michael Parides; Jonathan Glashow
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2011-04       Impact factor: 4.176

3.  Breakage of bioabsorbable femoral transfix screw after arthroscopic anterior cruciate ligament repair: a report of two cases.

Authors:  A Raviraj; Ashish Anand; K Santosh
Journal:  Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol       Date:  2012-02-04

4.  A randomized prospective controlled study with 5-year follow-up of cross-pin femoral fixation versus metal interference screw fixation in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction.

Authors:  Patrick Björkman; Jerker Sandelin; Arsi Harilainen
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2014-05-15       Impact factor: 4.342

Review 5.  Fixation techniques for the anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: early follow-up. A systematic review of level I and II therapeutic studies.

Authors:  Andrea Speziali; Marco Delcogliano; Matteo Tei; Giacomo Placella; Matteo Bartoli; Amerigo Menghi; Giuliano Cerulli
Journal:  Musculoskelet Surg       Date:  2014-10-01

6.  Hamstring Autograft versus Patellar Tendon Autograft for ACL Reconstruction: Is There a Difference in Graft Failure Rate? A Meta-analysis of 47,613 Patients.

Authors:  Brian T Samuelsen; Kate E Webster; Nick R Johnson; Timothy E Hewett; Aaron J Krych
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2017-10       Impact factor: 4.176

Review 7.  Bioabsorbable versus metallic interference screws for graft fixation in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction.

Authors:  Pedro Debieux; Carlos E S Franciozi; Mário Lenza; Marcel Jun Tamaoki; Robert A Magnussen; Flávio Faloppa; João Carlos Belloti
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2016-07-24

Review 8.  Current trends in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction.

Authors:  Ha Sung Kim; Jong Keun Seon; Ah Reum Jo
Journal:  Knee Surg Relat Res       Date:  2013-11-29

9.  Interference screws are more likely to perform better than cortical button and cross-pin fixation for hamstring autograft in ACL reconstruction: a Bayesian network meta-analysis.

Authors:  Lei Yan; Jiao Jiao Li; Yuanyuan Zhu; Haifeng Liu; Ruxing Liu; Bin Zhao; Bin Wang
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2020-08-19       Impact factor: 4.342

10.  Clinical Outcome of Anatomical Transportal Arthroscopic Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction with Hamstring Tendon Autograft.

Authors:  Omid Shahpari; Moslem FallahKezabi; Hamid Hejrati Kalati; Farshid Bagheri; Mohammad H Ebrahimzadeh
Journal:  Arch Bone Jt Surg       Date:  2018-03
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.