Literature DB >> 26122668

Clinical and functional outcome after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction using the LARS™ system at a minimum follow-up of 10 years.

Thomas M Tiefenboeck1, Elisabeth Thurmaier1, Michael M Tiefenboeck2, Roman C Ostermann1, Julian Joestl1, Markus Winnisch1, Mark Schurz1, Stefan Hajdu1, Marcus Hofbauer3.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Since the 1980's several artificial ligaments were used for reconstruction of the anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) serving different complications. The aim of this study was to assess the clinical and functional outcomes of primary ACL reconstruction using the Ligament Augmentation Reconstruction System (LARS™) with a minimum follow-up of 10-years. The LARS™ presents a synthetic material consisting of non-absorbing polyethylene terephthalate fibres used for ligament reconstruction.
METHODS: Outcomes of 18 patients who underwent arthroscopic ACL reconstruction using the LARS™ system between 2000 and 2004 with a minimum follow-up of 10 years were observed. The International Knee Documentation Committee score (IKDC), Visual Analog Scale (VAS), Lysholm score, and Tegner Activity Scale were assessed. Clinical assessment was performed by Lachman testing, assessment of side-to-side difference on KT-2000 testing and plain radiography evaluation of osteoarthritis.
RESULTS: There were seven males and 11 females, mean age 29 years (range, 18 to 44 years) and a mean follow-up of 151.5 months. Five patients (27.8%) sustained a re-rupture of the LARS™ system and underwent revision surgery after a mean time of 23 months and four patients (22.2%) presented with a re-rupture. The average IKDC score was 76.60 ± 18.18, the average Lysholm score was 88.00 ± 10.07 and the average Tegner activity score was five at final follow-up.
CONCLUSION: Our results indicate that the LARS™ system should currently not be suggested as a potential graft for primary reconstruction of the ACL. In special cases, however, the LARS™ system can serve as an alternative graft.
Copyright © 2015 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  ACL reconstruction; Functional outcome; LARS™ system; Long-term follow-up

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 26122668     DOI: 10.1016/j.knee.2015.06.003

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


  24 in total

1.  Allograft Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction Utilizing Internal Brace Augmentation.

Authors:  Patrick A Smith; Jordan A Bley
Journal:  Arthrosc Tech       Date:  2016-10-10

Review 2.  Network meta-analysis of knee outcomes following anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction with various types of tendon grafts.

Authors:  Xiong-Gang Yang; Feng Wang; Xin He; Jiang-Tao Feng; Yong-Cheng Hu; Hao Zhang; Li Yang; Kunchi Hua
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2019-12-19       Impact factor: 3.075

3.  [Artificial ligaments applied in anterior cruciate ligament repair and reconstruction: Current products and experience].

Authors:  Tianwu Chen; Shiyi Chen
Journal:  Zhongguo Xiu Fu Chong Jian Wai Ke Za Zhi       Date:  2020-01-15

4.  LARS™ in ACL reconstruction: evaluation of 60 cases with 5-year minimum follow-up.

Authors:  G Bugelli; G Dell'Osso; F Ascione; E Gori; V Bottai; S Giannotti
Journal:  Musculoskelet Surg       Date:  2017-09-05

5.  Primary ACL reconstruction using the LARS device is associated with a high failure rate at minimum of 6-year follow-up.

Authors:  Scott John Tulloch; Brian Meldan Devitt; Tabitha Porter; Taylor Hartwig; Haydn Klemm; Sam Hookway; Cameron John Norsworthy
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2019-03-22       Impact factor: 4.342

6.  Use of Ligament Advanced Reinforcement System tube in stabilization of proximal humeral endoprostheses.

Authors:  Nikolaos A Stavropoulos; Hassan Sawan; Firas Dandachli; Robert E Turcotte
Journal:  World J Orthop       Date:  2016-04-18

7.  LARS Artificial Ligament Versus ABC Purely Polyester Ligament for Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction.

Authors:  Dimitrios Ph Iliadis; Dimitrios N Bourlos; Dimitrios S Mastrokalos; Efstathios Chronopoulos; George C Babis
Journal:  Orthop J Sports Med       Date:  2016-06-15

Review 8.  Anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction, rehabilitation, and return to play: 2015 update.

Authors:  John Nyland; Alma Mattocks; Shane Kibbe; Alaa Kalloub; Joe W Greene; David N M Caborn
Journal:  Open Access J Sports Med       Date:  2016-02-24

9.  The potential of using semitendinosus tendon as autograft in rabbit meniscus reconstruction.

Authors:  Chenxi Li; Xiaoqing Hu; Qingyang Meng; Xin Zhang; Jingxian Zhu; Linghui Dai; Jin Cheng; Mingjin Zhong; Weili Shi; Bo Ren; Jiying Zhang; Xin Fu; Xiaoning Duan; Yingfang Ao
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2017-08-01       Impact factor: 4.379

10.  Comparison of artificial graft versus autograft in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a meta-analysis.

Authors:  Zhen-Yu Jia; Chen Zhang; Shi-Qi Cao; Chen-Chen Xue; Tian-Ze Liu; Xuan Huang; Wei-Dong Xu
Journal:  BMC Musculoskelet Disord       Date:  2017-07-19       Impact factor: 2.362

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.