Literature DB >> 25269758

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

Andrea Speziali1, Marco Delcogliano, Matteo Tei, Giacomo Placella, Matteo Bartoli, Amerigo Menghi, Giuliano Cerulli.   

Abstract

The purpose of our study was that to systematically review the fixation techniques for the ACL reconstruction and associated clinical outcomes at the early follow-up. Systematic search on three electronic databases (Cochrane register, Medline and Embase) of fixation devices used for primary ACL reconstruction with doubled semitendinosus and gracilis and bone-patellar tendon-bone autografts in randomized clinical trials of level I and II of evidence published from January 2001 to December 2011. Therapeutic studies collected were with a minimum 12-month follow-up, and the clinical outcomes were evaluated by at least one of International Knee Documentation Committee, Lysholm and Tegner functional scales and at least one of the following knee stability tests: arthrometric AP tibial translation, Lachman test and pivot-shift test. Nineteen articles met the inclusion criteria. At the femoral side cross-pin, metallic interference screw, bioabsorbable interference screw, and suspensory device were used in 32.3, 27.3, 24.8, 15.5% of patients, respectively. At the tibial side fixation was achieved with metallic interference screw, bioabsorbable interference screw, screw and plastic sheath, screw post and cross-pin in 38.7, 31, 15.7, 12.8, and 1.7% of patients, respectively. Side-to-side anterior-posterior tibial translation was 1.9 ± 0.9, 1.5 ± 0.9, 1.5 ± 0.8, 2.2 ± 0.4 mm for metallic interference screw, bioabsorbable screw, cross-pin and suspensory device, respectively. At least two-third of all the patients achieved good-to-excellent clinical outcomes. Rate of failure was 6.1, 3.3, 1.7 and 1.2% for bioabsorbable interference screw, metallic interference screw, cross-pin and suspensory device, respectively. Clinical outcomes are good to excellent in almost two-third of the patients but several pitfalls that affect the current fixation techniques as graft tensioning such as graft-tunnel motion are still unaddressed.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 25269758     DOI: 10.1007/s12306-014-0338-8

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Musculoskelet Surg        ISSN: 2035-5114


  55 in total

1.  Hamstring anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a comparison of bioabsorbable interference screw and endobutton-post fixation.

Authors:  C Benjamin Ma; Kimberly Francis; Jeffrey Towers; Jay Irrgang; Freddie H Fu; Christopher H Harner
Journal:  Arthroscopy       Date:  2004-02       Impact factor: 4.772

2.  Initial tension and anterior load-displacement behavior of high-stiffness anterior cruciate ligament graft constructs.

Authors:  Ari Karchin; M L Hull; S M Howell
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am       Date:  2004-08       Impact factor: 5.284

Review 3.  ACL injury and reconstruction: Clinical related in vivo biomechanics.

Authors:  A D Georgoulis; S Ristanis; C O Moraiti; N Paschos; F Zampeli; S Xergia; S Georgiou; K Patras; H S Vasiliadis; G Mitsionis
Journal:  Orthop Traumatol Surg Res       Date:  2010-10-29       Impact factor: 2.256

4.  Viscoelasticity and temperature variations decrease tension and stiffness of hamstring tendon grafts following anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction.

Authors:  William J Ciccone; Derek R Bratton; David M Weinstein; John J Elias
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am       Date:  2006-05       Impact factor: 5.284

5.  Aperture fixation in arthroscopic anterior cruciate ligament double-bundle reconstruction.

Authors:  Peter U Brucker; Stephan Lorenz; Andreas B Imhoff
Journal:  Arthroscopy       Date:  2006-09-11       Impact factor: 4.772

6.  Biomechanical evaluation of different anterior cruciate ligament fixation techniques for hamstring graft.

Authors:  E Monaco; L Labianca; A Speranza; A M Agrò; G Camillieri; C D'Arrigo; A Ferretti
Journal:  J Orthop Sci       Date:  2010-02-12       Impact factor: 1.601

7.  A long-term, prospective, randomized study comparing biodegradable and metal interference screws in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction surgery: radiographic results and clinical outcome.

Authors:  Sven Stener; Lars Ejerhed; Ninni Sernert; Gauti Laxdal; Lars Rostgård-Christensen; Jüri Kartus
Journal:  Am J Sports Med       Date:  2010-04-14       Impact factor: 6.202

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

Authors:  Arsi Harilainen; Jerker Sandelin
Journal:  Am J Sports Med       Date:  2009-02-02       Impact factor: 6.202

9.  Visual evidence of acidic environment within degrading poly(lactic-co-glycolic acid) (PLGA) microspheres.

Authors:  K Fu; D W Pack; A M Klibanov; R Langer
Journal:  Pharm Res       Date:  2000-01       Impact factor: 4.200

10.  Knee joint infection after ACL reconstruction: prevalence, management and functional outcomes.

Authors:  R Torres-Claramunt; X Pelfort; J Erquicia; S Gil-González; P E Gelber; L Puig; J C Monllau
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2012-10-27       Impact factor: 4.342

View more
  7 in total

Review 1.  Preservation of hamstring tibial insertion in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a review of the current literature.

Authors:  A Ruffilli; F Traina; G Evangelisti; R Borghi; F Perna; C Faldini
Journal:  Musculoskelet Surg       Date:  2015-02-08

Review 2.  Outcome measures in clinical ACL studies: an analysis of highly cited level I trials.

Authors:  Sufian S Ahmad; Johannes C Meyer; Anna M Krismer; Suhaib S Ahmad; Dimitrios S Evangelopoulos; Sven Hoppe; Sandro Kohl
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2016-10-14       Impact factor: 4.342

3.  Press-fit fixation in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction yields low graft failure and revision rates: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Ajaykumar Shanmugaraj; Mathepan Mahendralingam; Chetan Gohal; Nolan Horner; Nicole Simunovic; Volker Musahl; Kristian Samuelsson; Olufemi R Ayeni
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2020-08-12       Impact factor: 4.342

4.  Outcome of arthroscopic single-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: anteromedial portal technique versus transtibial drilling technique.

Authors:  S Rezazadeh; H Ettehadi; A R Vosoughi
Journal:  Musculoskelet Surg       Date:  2015-12-08

5.  The single-suture technique for anterior cruciate ligament graft preparation provides similar stability as a three-suture technique: a biomechanical in vitro study in a porcine model.

Authors:  Jan Theopold; Stefan Schleifenbaum; Alexander Georgi; Michael Schmidt; Ralf Henkelmann; Georg Osterhoff; Pierre Hepp
Journal:  Arch Orthop Trauma Surg       Date:  2020-01-24       Impact factor: 3.067

6.  Femoral fixation methods for hamstring graft in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: A network meta-analysis of controlled clinical trials.

Authors:  Shixin Nie; Shuqing Zhou; Wei Huang
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2022-09-22       Impact factor: 3.752

7.  Safety of the application of Rigidfix cross-pin system via different tibial tunnels for tibial fixation during anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction.

Authors:  Jian Wang; Hua-Qiang Fan; Wenli Dai; Hong-Da Li; Yang-Pan Fu; Zhenhuang Liu; Chang-Ming Huang; Zhanjun Shi
Journal:  BMC Musculoskelet Disord       Date:  2020-11-11       Impact factor: 2.362

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.