Literature DB >> 26948548

Comparison of Anatomic Double- and Single-Bundle Techniques for Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction Using Hamstring Tendon Autografts: A Prospective Randomized Study With 5-Year Clinical and Radiographic Follow-up.

Ioannis Karikis1, Neel Desai2, Ninni Sernert3, Lars Rostgard-Christensen4, Jüri Kartus5.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The aim of this prospective randomized study was to compare the outcomes of the anatomic double-bundle (DB) and anatomic single-bundle (SB) techniques 5 years after anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction. Since more effective restoration of rotational laxity is considered the main advantage of the DB technique, the pivot-shift test was the primary outcome variable of the study. HYPOTHESIS: Double-bundle ACL reconstruction will result in a better outcome in terms of the pivot-shift test. STUDY
DESIGN: Randomized controlled trial; Level of evidence, 1.
METHODS: A total of 105 patients (33 women, 72 men; median age, 27 years; range, 18-52 years) were randomized and underwent ACL reconstruction (DB group, n = 53; SB group, n = 52). All reconstructions were performed anatomically by identifying the ACL footprints, using the anteromedial portal for the femoral tunnel drilling, and utilizing interference screw for tibial and femoral fixation. A single blinded observer examined the patients preoperatively and at follow-up (median, 64 months; range, 55-75 months). Multiple subjective and objective clinical evaluation tests and radiographic assessments of osteoarthritis (OA) were performed using the Ahlbäck, Kellgren-Lawrence, and Fairbank grading systems at 6 weeks postoperatively and at the final follow-up evaluation.
RESULTS: Preoperatively, no differences were found between the study groups, apart from the preinjury Tegner activity level, which was lower in the DB group (SB: mean, 7.8 [range, 3-9]; DB: mean, 7.3 [range, 0-9]; P = .02). Eighty-seven patients (83%) were available for examination at the 5-year follow-up. Statistical differences could not be found between the groups in terms of the pivot-shift test, KT-1000 arthrometer laxity measurements, manual Lachman test, single-legged-hop test, square-hop test, range of motion, Lysholm knee scoring scale, Tegner activity scale, or Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score. Correspondingly, no differences were found between the groups regarding the presence of OA at follow-up. However, a significant increase of OA was found within the DB group at the 5-year follow-up. Both groups improved at follow-up compared with the preoperative assessment in terms of the laxity tests, hop tests, and scoring scales.
CONCLUSION: At the 5-year follow-up of an unselected group of patients, anatomic DB reconstruction was not superior to anatomic SB reconstruction in terms of the pivot-shift test.
© 2016 The Author(s).

Entities:  

Keywords:  anatomic; anterior cruciate ligament; double-bundle; randomized controlled trial; reconstruction; single-bundle

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 26948548     DOI: 10.1177/0363546515626543

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am J Sports Med        ISSN: 0363-5465            Impact factor:   6.202


  16 in total

1.  Anatomic Double-Bundle Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction With a Free Quadriceps Tendon Autograft.

Authors:  Sergiu Caterev; Dan Viorel Nistor; Adrian Todor
Journal:  Arthrosc Tech       Date:  2016-09-19

2.  Patient satisfaction with health is substantially improved following ACL reconstruction.

Authors:  Philipp Minzlaff; Thomas Heidt; Matthias J Feucht; Johannes E Plath; Stefan Hinterwimmer; Andreas B Imhoff; Tim Saier
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2017-06-26       Impact factor: 4.342

3.  Functional double-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction using hamstring tendon autografts with preserved insertions is an effective treatment for tibiofemoral instability.

Authors:  Qiang Zhang; Yimeng Yang; Ji Li; Hao Zhang; Yangmu Fu; Yan Wang
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2019-02-22       Impact factor: 4.342

Review 4.  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

5.  Double-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction is better than single-bundle reconstruction in terms of objective assessment but not in terms of subjective score.

Authors:  Faisal Ahmed Hashem El-Sherief; Wael Abdelkarim Aldahshan; Yaser Elsayed Wahd; Ashraf Mohamed Abdelaziz; Hany Abdel Gawwad Soliman; Tohamy Goda Hassan; Hassan Fathy Elbehairy; Adel Hamed Awadallah
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2017-11-20       Impact factor: 4.342

6.  Double bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: Failure rate and patients-reported outcomes at 4-11 years of follow up.

Authors:  Piero Volpi; Alessandro Quaglia; Giulia Carimati; Marco Galli; Rocco Papalia; Stefano Petrillo
Journal:  J Orthop       Date:  2019-02-28

Review 7.  [Research progress in anterolateral ligament of knee].

Authors:  Zhong Zhang; Kaibo Zhang; Beini Mao; Sike Lai; Jian Li; Weili Fu
Journal:  Zhongguo Xiu Fu Chong Jian Wai Ke Za Zhi       Date:  2020-05-15

Review 8.  Single-bundle versus double-bundle autologous anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials at 5-year minimum follow-up.

Authors:  Haitao Chen; Biao Chen; Kai Tie; Zhengdao Fu; Liaobin Chen
Journal:  J Orthop Surg Res       Date:  2018-03-10       Impact factor: 2.359

9.  Anatomic Double-Bundle Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction with Hamstring Tendon Autograft through Single Femoral Tunnel and Single Branched Tibial Tunnel.

Authors:  Naser Mohamed Selim
Journal:  Arthrosc Tech       Date:  2018-09-10

10.  Prediction of graft length by body height in anatomic double-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction.

Authors:  Akio Matsumoto; Motoi Yamaguchi; Ken Sasaki; Ryo Kanto
Journal:  Asia Pac J Sports Med Arthrosc Rehabil Technol       Date:  2018-03-30
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.