Literature DB >> 26753501

Minimally invasive semitendinosus tendon harvesting from the popliteal fossa versus conventional hamstring tendon harvesting for ACL reconstruction: A prospective, randomised controlled trial in 100 patients.

Wolfgang Franz1, Andreas Baumann2.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: This study aims to compare a technique for hamstring tendon harvesting from a postero-medial incision in the popliteal fossa with the conventional method.
METHODS: One hundred patients who underwent anterior cruciate ligament (ACL)-reconstruction were randomised to either have their tendon graft harvested from postero-medial (group 1) or via an antero-medial approach (group 2). Time for tendon harvest, length of skin incision and duration of tendon harvest were recorded as well as complications and sensory disturbances in the lower leg. Pain scores were documented on the VAS scale.
RESULTS: Time for tendon harvesting averaged one minute 23 s in group 1 versus five minutes 20 s in group 2 (p<0.01). The skin incision measured 21 mm (group 1) versus 49 mm in group 2 (p<0.01). The length of the harvested tendon averaged 272 mm (group 1) and 292 mm in group 2 (p<0.01). There was one superficial wound infection in group 2 and none in group 1. Postoperative pain scores were similar in both groups. None of the patients in group 1 reported sensory disturbance in the lower leg, whilst seven patients in group 2 were found to have reduced sensation in the distribution of the saphenous nerve postoperatively (p<0.01).
CONCLUSION: This study confirms that harvesting the semitendinosus tendon from postero-medial is quicker, results in a shorter scar and reduces the risk of injury to branches of the saphenous nerve. However, harvesting the tendon from postero-medial resulted in a shorter tendon graft. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level I (Randomised, controlled trial).
Copyright © 2015 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  ACL reconstruction; Minimally invasive tendon harvesting; Popliteal fossa; Saphenous nerve injury; Semitendinosus tendon

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 26753501     DOI: 10.1016/j.knee.2015.09.001

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


  4 in total

1.  Posterior Approach With Small Incision Is a Safe Alternative to Anterior Approach for Hamstring Autograft Harvest in Adolescents.

Authors:  Alexandra H Aitchison; Lindsay M Schlichte; Madison R Heath; Peter D Fabricant; Daniel W Green
Journal:  HSS J       Date:  2022-03-25

Review 2.  Saphenous nerve injury during hamstring tendons harvest: Does the incision matter? A systematic review.

Authors:  A Ruffilli; M De Fine; F Traina; F Pilla; D Fenga; C Faldini
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2016-06-23       Impact factor: 4.342

3.  Tendon incontinence repair - First experience with an autologous semitendinosus tendon transplant for urinary stress incontinence treatment.

Authors:  Amadeus Hornemann; Benjamin Hoch; Wolfgang Franz; Marc Sütterlin
Journal:  Urol Case Rep       Date:  2020-05-21

4.  ACL reconstruction with femoral and tibial adjustable versus fixed-loop suspensory fixation: a retrospective cohort study.

Authors:  Sebastian Schützenberger; F Keller; S Grabner; D Kontic; D Schallmayer; M Komjati; C Fialka
Journal:  J Orthop Surg Res       Date:  2022-04-19       Impact factor: 2.677

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.