Literature DB >> 25242512

Mid- to long-term results of single-bundle versus double-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: randomized controlled trial.

Hideyuki Koga1, Takeshi Muneta2, Kazuyoshi Yagishita2, Toshifumi Watanabe2, Tomoyuki Mochizuki2, Masafumi Horie2, Tomomasa Nakamura2, Koji Otabe2, Ichiro Sekiya2.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To evaluate the mid-to long-term results of a randomized controlled trial of single-bundle (SB) versus double-bundle (DB) anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction using a semitendinosus tendon.
METHODS: Seventy-eight patients who underwent primary ACL reconstruction with an autologous semitendinosus tendon were prospectively randomized into 2 groups: SB reconstruction (n = 39) and DB reconstruction (n = 39). In both groups, grafts were fixed at 30° of flexion with a total tension of 80 N. The following evaluation methods were used: clinical examination, KT-1000 arthrometer (MEDmetric, San Diego, CA) measurement, muscle strength, Tegner activity score, Lysholm score, subjective rating scale regarding patient satisfaction and sports performance level, graft retear, contralateral ACL tear, and additional meniscus surgery.
RESULTS: Fifty-three patients (25 in SB group and 28 in DB group) who were followed up for a minimum of 3 years (mean, 69 months; range, 36 to 140 months) were evaluated. Preoperatively, there were no differences between the groups. Postoperatively, the Lachman and pivot-shift test results were better in the DB group (P = .024 and P < .0001, respectively). KT measurements were better in the DB group (mean, 1.4 mm v 2.7 mm; P = .0023). The Tegner score was also better in the DB group (P = .033). There were no significant differences in range of motion, muscle strength, Lysholm score, subjective rating scale, graft retear, and secondary meniscal tear.
CONCLUSIONS: In ACL reconstruction using the transtibial approach, DB reconstruction was significantly better than SB reconstruction regarding anterior and rotational stability during the 3- to 12-year follow-up. The results of KT measurements and the Lachman and pivot-shift tests were significantly better in the DB group, whereas there was no difference in the anterior drawer test results. The Tegner score was also better in the DB group; however, there were no differences in the other subjective findings. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level II, lesser-quality prospective randomized trial.
Copyright © 2015 Arthroscopy Association of North America. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 25242512     DOI: 10.1016/j.arthro.2014.07.020

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Arthroscopy        ISSN: 0749-8063            Impact factor:   4.772


  19 in total

1.  Comparison of outcome after anatomic double-bundle and antero-medial portal non-anatomic single-bundle reconstruction in ACL-injured patients.

Authors:  Ioannis Karikis; Mattias Ahldén; Abraham Casut; Ninni Sernert; Jüri Kartus
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2016-04-22       Impact factor: 4.342

Review 2.  The past, present and future of ligament regenerative engineering.

Authors:  Paulos Y Mengsteab; Lakshmi S Nair; Cato T Laurencin
Journal:  Regen Med       Date:  2016-11-23       Impact factor: 3.806

3.  Double-bundle revision anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction is effective in rescuing failed primary reconstruction and re-introducing patients to physical exercise.

Authors:  Changqing Jiang; Guofei Chen; Peng Chen; Wei Li; Honglei Zhang; Wentao Zhang
Journal:  Exp Ther Med       Date:  2017-12-15       Impact factor: 2.447

4.  [Comparable results after arthroscopic replacement of the anterior cruciate ligament : Clinical and functional results after single bundle and double bundle reconstruction].

Authors:  M Janko; R D Verboket; E Plawetzki; E V Geiger; T Lustenberger; I Marzi; C Nau
Journal:  Chirurg       Date:  2020-01       Impact factor: 0.955

Review 5.  Comparison of single-bundle versus double-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction after a minimum of 3-year follow-up: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

Authors:  Gang Chen; Shouguo Wang
Journal:  Int J Clin Exp Med       Date:  2015-09-15

Review 6.  Single Bundle Versus Double Bundle Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

Authors:  Mohammed S Alomari; Abdullah A Ghaddaf; Ahmed S Abdulhamid; Mohammed S Alshehri; Mujeeb Ashraf; Hatem H Alharbi
Journal:  Indian J Orthop       Date:  2022-08-29       Impact factor: 1.033

7.  Better 4-year outcomes for anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction with double-layer versus single-layer bone-patellar tendon-bone allografts.

Authors:  Yingzhen Niu; Guman Duan; Fei Wang; Shiyu Tang; Yao Li; Jiangfeng Lu; Xu Yang
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2015-12-24       Impact factor: 4.342

Review 8.  Twenty-Year Experience of a Double-Bundle Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction.

Authors:  Takeshi Muneta
Journal:  Clin Orthop Surg       Date:  2015-05-18

9.  Double-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction improves tibial rotational instability: analysis of squatting motion using a 2D/3D registration technique.

Authors:  Kenichi Kidera; Akihiko Yonekura; Takeshi Miyaji; Yusuke Nakazoe; Kazuyoshi Gamada; Kei Yoneta; Futoshi Ikuta; Masato Tomita; Takashi Miyamoto; Shiro Kajiyama; Akira Hozumi; Ko Chiba; Narihiro Okazaki; Takayuki Shida; Makoto Osaki
Journal:  J Orthop Surg Res       Date:  2018-05-16       Impact factor: 2.359

10.  Positioning of the femoral tunnel in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: functional anatomical reconstruction.

Authors:  Pedro Baches Jorge; Diego Escudeiro; Nilson Roberto Severino; Cláudio Santili; Ricardo de Paula Leite Cury; Aires Duarte Junior; Luiz Gabriel Betoni Guglielmetti
Journal:  BMJ Open Sport Exerc Med       Date:  2018-10-01
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.