Literature DB >> 19575180

Knee laxity measurements after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction, using either bone-patellar-tendon-bone or hamstring tendon autografts, with special emphasis on comparison over time.

Mattias Ahldén1, Jüri Kartus, Lars Ejerhed, Jón Karlsson, Ninni Sernert.   

Abstract

The aims of the study were to analyse the change in knee laxity over time after anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction, using either bone-patellar-tendon-bone (BPTB) or hamstring (HS) tendon autografts, and to compare the knee laxity measurements between the study groups both pre-operatively and on multiple follow-up occasions. Another aim was to compare the radiographic findings in terms of degenerative changes between the study groups. A randomised series of 71 patients, who underwent ACL reconstruction using BPTB or HS tendon autografts and interference screw fixation, were included in the study. Of these patients, 47/71 (66%) attended a clinical examination, including laxity measurements using the KT-1000 arthrometer, pre-operatively and on four post-operative occasions; 6 months, 1 year, 2 years and 7 years after the reconstruction. The BPTB group consisted of 22 patients, while there were 25 patients in the HS group. There were no significant differences in the mean side-to-side knee laxity between the BPTB and the HS group pre-operatively or at the follow-up examinations. There was a tendency towards a reduction in side-to-side knee laxity over time in both groups, measured with the KT-1000 arthrometer. The decrease was significant when analysing the injured and uninjured knee separately (injured side p < 0.001 (BPTB) and p = 0.005 (HS), uninjured side p = 0.008 and p = 0.042, respectively). Forty-four patients (BPTB 21, ST 23) underwent a radiographic assessment at the 7-year follow-up, which revealed no significant differences between the study groups in terms of osteoarthritic findings classified according to the Fairbank and Ahlbäck rating systems. In overall terms, osteoarthritis was identified in 16% (BPTB 19%; ST 13%; n.s.) according to the Ahlbäck rating system and 68% (BPTB 67%; ST 70%; n.s.) according to the Fairbank rating system. There were no significant differences in knee laxity measurements between the two study groups pre-operatively or at 7 years. A decrease in knee laxity over time was seen in both groups. There were no significant differences between the BPTB and ST groups in terms of osteoarthritic findings at 7 years.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19575180     DOI: 10.1007/s00167-009-0846-5

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc        ISSN: 0942-2056            Impact factor:   4.342


  45 in total

1.  Comparison of functional outcome after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction resulting in low, normal and increased laxity.

Authors:  Ninni Sernert; J Kartus; K Köhler; L Ejerhed; S Brandsson; J Karlsson
Journal:  Scand J Med Sci Sports       Date:  2002-02       Impact factor: 4.221

2.  A five-year comparison of patellar tendon versus four-strand hamstring tendon autograft for arthroscopic reconstruction of the anterior cruciate ligament.

Authors:  Leo A Pinczewski; David J Deehan; Lucy J Salmon; Vivianne J Russell; Amanda Clingeleffer
Journal:  Am J Sports Med       Date:  2002 Jul-Aug       Impact factor: 6.202

3.  Arthroscopic ACL reconstruction: a 5-9 year follow-up.

Authors:  A L Ruiz; M Kelly; R W Nutton
Journal:  Knee       Date:  2002-09       Impact factor: 2.199

4.  Intra- and intertester reliability and criterion validity of the parallelogram and universal goniometers for measuring maximum active knee flexion and extension of patients with knee restrictions.

Authors:  L Brosseau; S Balmer; M Tousignant; J P O'Sullivan; C Goudreault; M Goudreault; S Gringras
Journal:  Arch Phys Med Rehabil       Date:  2001-03       Impact factor: 3.966

5.  A 7-year follow-up of patellar tendon and hamstring tendon grafts for arthroscopic anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: differences and similarities.

Authors:  Justin Roe; Leo A Pinczewski; Vivianne J Russell; Lucy J Salmon; Tomomaro Kawamata; Melvin Chew
Journal:  Am J Sports Med       Date:  2005-07-07       Impact factor: 6.202

6.  Osteoarthrosis of the knee. A radiographic investigation.

Authors:  S Ahlbäck
Journal:  Acta Radiol Diagn (Stockh)       Date:  1968

7.  Rating systems in the evaluation of knee ligament injuries.

Authors:  Y Tegner; J Lysholm
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  1985-09       Impact factor: 4.176

8.  Arthroscopic reconstruction of the anterior cruciate ligament. A comparison of patellar tendon autograft and four-strand hamstring tendon autograft.

Authors:  I S Corry; J M Webb; A J Clingeleffer; L A Pinczewski
Journal:  Am J Sports Med       Date:  1999 Jul-Aug       Impact factor: 6.202

9.  Stability results of hamstring anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction at 2- to 8-year follow-up.

Authors:  Chadwick C Prodromos; Yung S Han; Brett L Keller; Richelle J Bolyard
Journal:  Arthroscopy       Date:  2005-02       Impact factor: 4.772

Review 10.  Patellar tendon or four-strand hamstring? A systematic review of autografts for anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction.

Authors:  Mark C Forster; Ian W Forster
Journal:  Knee       Date:  2005-06       Impact factor: 2.199

View more
  24 in total

1.  Objective evaluation of anterior knee laxity; comparison of the KT-1000 and GNRB® arthrometers.

Authors:  Michel Collette; Julie Courville; Marc Forton; Bertrand Gagnière
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2012-01-10       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

Review 3.  Dynamic knee laxity measurement devices.

Authors:  Mattias Ahldén; Yuichi Hoshino; Kristian Samuelsson; Paulo Araujo; Volker Musahl; Jón Karlsson
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2011-12-31       Impact factor: 4.342

4.  ACL injuries: unanswered questions--are there any solutions?

Authors:  Jon Karlsson
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2010-03       Impact factor: 4.342

5.  A prospective randomized comparison of irradiated and non-irradiated hamstring tendon allograft for ACL reconstruction.

Authors:  Kang Sun; Jihua Zhang; Yan Wang; Cailong Zhang; Changsuo Xia; Tengbo Yu; Shaoqi Tian
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2011-02-03       Impact factor: 4.342

6.  Evaluating rotational kinematics of the knee in ACL reconstructed patients using 3.0 Tesla magnetic resonance imaging.

Authors:  Abbas Kothari; Bryan Haughom; Karupppasamy Subburaj; Brian Feeley; Xiaojuan Li; C Benjamin Ma
Journal:  Knee       Date:  2012-01-20       Impact factor: 2.199

Review 7.  Objective measurements of static anterior and rotational knee laxity.

Authors:  Caroline Mouton; Daniel Theisen; Romain Seil
Journal:  Curr Rev Musculoskelet Med       Date:  2016-06

Review 8.  Osteoarthritis prevalence following anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a systematic review and numbers-needed-to-treat analysis.

Authors:  Brittney Luc; Phillip A Gribble; Brian G Pietrosimone
Journal:  J Athl Train       Date:  2014 Nov-Dec       Impact factor: 2.860

9.  Evaluating rotational kinematics of the knee in ACL-ruptured and healthy patients using 3.0 Tesla magnetic resonance imaging.

Authors:  Bryan D Haughom; Richard Souza; William W Schairer; Xiaojuan Li; C Benjamin Ma
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2011-12-08       Impact factor: 4.342

10.  Increased incidence of osteoarthritis of knee joint after ACL reconstruction with bone-patellar tendon-bone autografts than hamstring autografts: a meta-analysis of 1,443 patients at a minimum of 5 years.

Authors:  Xiaobo Xie; Zhuo Xiao; Qi Li; Bo Zhu; Jingxian Chen; Huamu Chen; Fangyuan Yang; Yuting Chen; Qianwei Lai; Xuzhou Liu
Journal:  Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol       Date:  2014-04-21
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.