Literature DB >> 27385681

Surgical Technique Trends in Primary ACL Reconstruction from 2007 to 2014.

Lisa Tibor1, Priscilla H Chan2, Tadashi T Funahashi3, Ronald Wyatt4, Gregory B Maletis5, Maria C S Inacio2.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The surgical technique for anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction has evolved as a result of improved understanding of ligament biomechanics, anatomy, device development, and failed reconstructions. Studies on surgical technique preferences have been limited to surgeon surveys, which are subject to selection and recall bias. The purpose of this study was to evaluate ACL reconstruction surgical technique and yearly revision rate trends in a community-based setting.
METHODS: A population-based epidemiological study was conducted using data on primary ACL reconstruction procedures registered in an ACL reconstruction registry from 2007 to 2014. Changes in the incidence rates of different types of femoral tunnel drilling methods, different types of grafts and graft fixation, and revisions were studied. Adjusted incidence rate ratios (IRRs) are provided.
RESULTS: Of the 21,686 ACL reconstructions studied, 72.4% were performed by sports medicine fellowship-trained surgeons. The incidence rate of femoral tunnel drilling via a tibial tunnel decreased at an adjusted rate of 26% per year (IRR = 0.74, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.71 to 0.78), from 56.4% to 17.6% during the study period. The incidence rate of medial portal drilling increased from 41.3% to 65.1% at an adjusted rate of 11% per year (IRR = 1.11, 95% CI = 1.09 to 1.13), and the incidence rate of drilling through a lateral approach increased from 2.3% to 17.3% at an adjusted rate of 53% per year (IRR = 1.53, 95% CI = 1.39 to 1.67). There was no change in the use of hamstring autograft, bone-patellar tendon-bone autograft, or tibial tendon allograft. Use of first-generation bioabsorbable femoral and tibial fixation decreased for all graft types. For soft-tissue grafts, usage of suspensory metal femoral fixation increased 12% to 13% per year (IRR = 1.12, 95% CI = 1.09 to 1.15 for tibial tendon grafts; IRR = 1.13, 95% CI = 1.10 to 1.15 for hamstring grafts). For bone-patellar tendon-bone autografts, the use of femoral fixation with interference biocomposite screws increased 7% per year (IRR = 1.07, 95% CI = 1.04 to 1.10). On the tibial side, utilization of biocomposite screws increased for all graft types. No association was found between revision rate and the year of the primary operation.
CONCLUSIONS: Surgeons changed their femoral tunnel drilling technique over the study period, whereas the incidence rates of specific graft utilization remained stable. There has been a shift away from first-generation bioabsorbable fixation and increasing use of biocomposite fixation across all graft types. Early cumulative revision rates remained stable.
Copyright © 2016 by The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery, Incorporated.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27385681     DOI: 10.2106/JBJS.15.00881

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am        ISSN: 0021-9355            Impact factor:   5.284


  28 in total

Review 1.  What Factors Influence the Biomechanical Properties of Allograft Tissue for ACL Reconstruction? A Systematic Review.

Authors:  Drew A Lansdown; Andrew J Riff; Molly Meadows; Adam B Yanke; Bernard R Bach
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2017-10       Impact factor: 4.176

2.  Preservation of remnant with poor synovial coverage has no beneficial effect over remnant sacrifice in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction.

Authors:  Bo Hyun Kim; Joong Il Kim; Osung Lee; Ki Woung Lee; Myung Chul Lee; Hyuk Soo Han
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2017-08-19       Impact factor: 4.342

Review 3.  Arthroscopic primary repair of the anterior cruciate ligament: what the radiologist needs to know.

Authors:  Steven P Daniels; Jelle P van der List; J Jacob Kazam; Gregory S DiFelice
Journal:  Skeletal Radiol       Date:  2017-12-28       Impact factor: 2.199

Review 4.  Outcomes Following ACL Reconstruction Based on Graft Type: Are all Grafts Equivalent?

Authors:  Matthew Widner; Mark Dunleavy; Scott Lynch
Journal:  Curr Rev Musculoskelet Med       Date:  2019-12

5.  Hamstring Autograft versus Patellar Tendon Autograft for ACL Reconstruction: Is There a Difference in Graft Failure Rate? A Meta-analysis of 47,613 Patients.

Authors:  Brian T Samuelsen; Kate E Webster; Nick R Johnson; Timothy E Hewett; Aaron J Krych
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2017-10       Impact factor: 4.176

6.  ACL surgical trends evolve in the last five years for young European surgeons: results of the survey among the U45 ESSKA members.

Authors:  S Cerciello; M Ollivier; B Kocaoglu; R S Khakha; R Seil
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2022-06-14       Impact factor: 4.342

Review 7.  Variations in common operations in athletes and non-Athletes.

Authors:  Amit Joshi; Bibek Basukala; Nagmani Singh; Sunil Panta; Rajiv Sharma; Ishor Pradhan
Journal:  J Orthop       Date:  2022-06-14

8.  Evaluation of Tibial Fixation Devices for Quadrupled Hamstring ACL Reconstruction.

Authors:  Elias Ammann; Andreas Hecker; Elias Bachmann; Jess G Snedeker; Sandro F Fucentese
Journal:  Orthop J Sports Med       Date:  2022-05-11

9.  Graft isometry during anatomical ACL reconstruction has little effect on surgical outcomes.

Authors:  Hyun-Soo Moon; Chong-Hyuk Choi; Je-Hyun Yoo; Min Jung; Tae-Ho Lee; Kee-Bum Hong; Sung-Hwan Kim
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2021-07-15       Impact factor: 4.342

10.  Hamstring Autograft Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction Using an All-Inside Technique With and Without Independent Suture Tape Reinforcement.

Authors:  Chad W Parkes; Devin P Leland; Bruce A Levy; Michael J Stuart; Christopher L Camp; Daniel B F Saris; Aaron J Krych
Journal:  Arthroscopy       Date:  2020-11-02       Impact factor: 4.772

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.