Literature DB >> 28068159

Suspensory Versus Aperture Fixation of a Quadrupled Hamstring Tendon Autograft in Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: A Meta-analysis.

William M Browning1, Melissa A Kluczynski2, Christian Curatolo2, John M Marzo2.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Hamstring grafts have become a popular choice for anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction; however, the most effective means of fixation of these soft tissue grafts is unknown.
PURPOSE: To determine whether suspensory or aperture fixation of hamstring tendon autografts provides better stability and clinical outcomes in ACL reconstruction. STUDY
DESIGN: Meta-analysis.
METHODS: A literature search of studies reporting single-bundle ACL reconstructions using 4-stranded hamstring tendon autografts with aperture or suspensory fixation with a minimum 24-month follow-up was conducted. Stability and clinical outcomes were compared for aperture versus suspensory fixation. Knee stability was measured with the Lachman or pivot-shift test or KT-1000 arthrometer side-to-side difference (SSD), and outcomes were determined with the International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC), Tegner, and Lysholm scores as well as graft failures. A random-effects model with a pooled estimate for the between-study variance was used to estimate proportions or means for each outcome and its corresponding 95% CI.
RESULTS: Forty-one studies were included, of which 20 utilized suspensory fixation techniques and 21 utilized aperture fixation techniques. A >3-mm SSD was seen more often in the aperture group than the suspensory group, which was statistically significant ( P < .0001), but there was no significant difference between groups for a >5-mm SSD ( P = .53). The aperture group demonstrated significantly more graft ruptures than did the suspensory group ( P = .03). There were no statistically significant differences in Lachman grade 0 ( P = .76), grade 1 ( P = .89), and grade 2 ( P = .55) or pivot-shift grade 0 ( P = .72), grade 1 ( P = .97), and grade 2 ( P = .28). There was no statistically significant difference in mean continuous IKDC ( P = .80), Tegner ( P = .34), or Lysholm ( P = .84) scores.
CONCLUSION: This meta-analysis demonstrated improved overall arthrometric stability and fewer graft ruptures using suspensory fixation compared with aperture fixation of a quadrupled hamstring tendon autograft in ACL reconstruction. There were no differences in IKDC, Lysholm, Lachman, and pivot-shift outcomes between suspensory and aperture fixation.

Entities:  

Keywords:  anterior cruciate ligament; aperture; autograft; fixation; hamstring; suspensory

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28068159     DOI: 10.1177/0363546516680995

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


  21 in total

1.  Adjustable buttons for ACL graft cortical fixation partially fail with cyclic loading and unloading.

Authors:  J Glasbrenner; C Domnick; M J Raschke; T Willinghöfer; C Kittl; P Michel; D Wähnert; Mirco Herbort
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2018-10-27       Impact factor: 4.342

2.  ACL hamstring grafts fixed using adjustable cortical suspension in both the femur and tibia demonstrate healing and integration on MRI at one year.

Authors:  Sven Putnis; Thomas Neri; Samuel Grasso; James Linklater; Brett Fritsch; David Parker
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2019-06-17       Impact factor: 4.342

Review 3.  Tibial tunnel expansion does not correlate with four-strand graft maturation after ACL reconstruction using adjustable cortical suspensory fixation.

Authors:  Alexandre Biset; Adil Douiri; James R Robinson; Pierre Laboudie; Philippe Colombet; Nicolas Graveleau; Nicolas Bouguennec
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2022-07-25       Impact factor: 4.114

4.  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

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.  Interference screws are more likely to perform better than cortical button and cross-pin fixation for hamstring autograft in ACL reconstruction: a Bayesian network meta-analysis.

Authors:  Lei Yan; Jiao Jiao Li; Yuanyuan Zhu; Haifeng Liu; Ruxing Liu; Bin Zhao; Bin Wang
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2020-08-19       Impact factor: 4.342

7.  Outcomes of retro-drilled all-inside tibial tunnel vs complete tibial tunnel techniques in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction-a comparative study.

Authors:  Tarun Goyal; Lakshmana Das; Souvik Paul; Arghya Kundu Choudhury; Siddharth S Sethy
Journal:  Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol       Date:  2021-05-24

8.  A Femoral Tunnel View Test During ACL Reconstruction.

Authors:  Eduardo Frois Temponi; João Newton Penido Oliveira; Luiz Fernando Machado Soares; Lúcio Honório de Carvalho Júnior
Journal:  Arthrosc Tech       Date:  2017-07-31

9.  Graft fixation influences revision risk after ACL reconstruction with hamstring tendon autografts.

Authors:  Andreas Persson; Tone Gifstad; Martin Lind; Lars Engebretsen; Knut Fjeldsgaard; Jon Olav Drogset; Magnus Forssblad; Birgitte Espehaug; Asle B Kjellsen; Jonas M Fevang
Journal:  Acta Orthop       Date:  2017-11-24       Impact factor: 3.717

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.