Literature DB >> 25937093

Evaluation and comparison of clinical results of femoral fixation devices in arthroscopic anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction.

Deniz Aydin1, Mert Ozcan2.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Several femoral fixation devices are available for hamstring tendon autograft in anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction, but the best technique is debatable.
PURPOSE: We hypothesised that different suspensory femoral fixation techniques have no superiority over each other. The aim of this study was to evaluate and compare the clinical results of different suspensory femoral fixation devices in arthroscopic ACL reconstruction. STUDY
DESIGN: This was a Level III, retrospective, comparative study.
METHODS: A total of 100 consecutive patients who underwent arthroscopic ACL reconstruction in a single institution with a mean follow-up time of 40 months (12-67 months) were divided into three groups according to femoral fixation devices as 'Endobutton' (n=34), 'Transfix' (n=35) and 'Aperfix' (n=31). The length of painful period after surgery, time to return to work and sporting activities, final range of motion, anterior drawer and Lachman tests, knee instability symptoms, International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) subjective knee evaluation score, Short Form 36 (SF-36) score, Lysholm knee score and Tegner point of the patients were evaluated and compared between groups.
RESULTS: There were no significant differences between the groups. All techniques led to significant recovery in knee instability tests and symptoms.
CONCLUSION: In this study, the clinical results of different suspensory femoral fixation techniques were found to be similar. We believe that different femoral fixation techniques have no effect on clinical results provided that the technique is correctly applied. The surgeon must choose a technique appropriate to his or her experience.
Copyright © 2015 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Anterior cruciate ligament; Arthroscopic reconstruction; Clinical results; Femoral fixation

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 25937093     DOI: 10.1016/j.knee.2015.04.004

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Knee        ISSN: 0968-0160            Impact factor:   2.199


  9 in total

1.  Femoral-tibial fixation affects risk of revision and reoperation after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction using hamstring autograft.

Authors:  Lindsey M Spragg; Heather A Prentice; Andrew Morris; Tadashi T Funahashi; Gregory B Maletis; Rick P Csintalan
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2019-03-01       Impact factor: 4.342

2.  A Surgical Technique for Posterolateral Placement of Interference Screw Accurately in Tibial Tunnel in Single-Bundle Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction.

Authors:  Prashant Parate; Bancha Chernchujit
Journal:  Arthrosc Tech       Date:  2016-12-26

3.  A prospective comparison of 3 hamstring ACL fixation devices-rigidfix, bioscrew, and intrafix-randomized into 4 groups with a minimum follow-up of 5 years.

Authors:  Leena Metso; Ville Bister; Jerker Sandelin; Arsi Harilainen
Journal:  BMC Surg       Date:  2022-06-30       Impact factor: 2.030

4.  TightRope Versus Biocomposite Interference Screw for Fixation in Allograft ACL Reconstruction: Prospective Evaluation of Osseous Integration and Patient Outcomes.

Authors:  Shahram Shawn Yari; Ashraf N El Naga; Amar Patel; Ali Asaf Qadeer; Anup Shah
Journal:  JB JS Open Access       Date:  2020-04-02

5.  No Difference in Outcomes Between Suspensory (Fixed-Loop Cortical Button) Versus Expandable Anteromedial Femoral Fixation in Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction With Autologous Hamstring Tendons: A Prospective, Randomized, Controlled Study in Male Patients.

Authors:  Andreas Panagopoulos; Dimitris Mylonas; Antonis Kouzelis; Petros Zampakis; Pantelis Kraniotis; John Lakoumentas; John Gliatis
Journal:  Arthrosc Sports Med Rehabil       Date:  2021-06-24

6.  Magnetic Resonance Imaging and Clinical Results of Outside-in Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: A Comparison of Fixed- and Adjustable-Length Loop Cortical Fixation.

Authors:  Jin Hwan Ahn; Taeg Su Ko; Yong Seuk Lee; Hwa Jae Jeong; Jong Kuen Park
Journal:  Clin Orthop Surg       Date:  2018-05-18

7.  Comparison of efficacy and safety of different fixation devices for anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: A Bayesian network meta-analysis protocol.

Authors:  Jiaxin Jin; Liping Yu; Min Wei; Yi Shang; Xin Wang
Journal:  Medicine (Baltimore)       Date:  2019-03       Impact factor: 1.889

8.  Clinical and Functional Outcomes of Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction at a Minimum of 2 Years Using Adjustable Suspensory Fixation in Both the Femur and Tibia: A Prospective Study.

Authors:  Philippe Colombet; Mo Saffarini; Nicolas Bouguennec
Journal:  Orthop J Sports Med       Date:  2018-10-22

9.  Graft Fixation and Timing of Surgery Are Predictors of Early Anterior Cruciate Ligament Revision: A Cohort Study from the Swedish and Norwegian Knee Ligament Registries Based on 18,425 Patients.

Authors:  Thorkell Snaebjörnsson; Eric Hamrin Senorski; Eleonor Svantesson; Olof Westin; Andreas Persson; Jon Karlsson; Kristian Samuelsson
Journal:  JB JS Open Access       Date:  2019-12-12
  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.