Literature DB >> 28219088

Single-Bundle versus Double-Bundle Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: A Prospective Randomized Controlled Trial with 6-Year Follow-up.

Paolo Adravanti1, Francesco Dini2, Laura de Girolamo3, Massimo Cattani1, Michele Attilio Rosa2.   

Abstract

Single-bundle (SB) anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction is increasingly used in a large number of patients and it allows obtaining very good clinical and subjective results; however, functional tests show a persistent rotational instability. Biomechanical studies seem to indicate that double-bundle (DB) ACL reconstruction allows to obtain increased anterior and rotational stability compared with SB. The aim of this prospective randomized controlled study was to compare the clinical outcome and the possible osteoarthritic evolution of patients treated either with a SB (freehand transtibial femoral tunnel) or with a DB technique (outside-in for posterolateral femoral tunnel/inside-out for anteromedial femoral tunnel) at a final follow-up of 6 years. A total of 60 patients with complete ACL rupture (age, 16-40 years) were prospectively randomized to SB (n = 30) or DB (n = 30) groups. Patients were evaluated preoperatively and after surgery at 6 months, 1, 3, and 6 years with Lysholm score, International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) form, and KT-2000 (Medmetric Corp). The degree of osteoarthritis (OA) based on the Kellgren-Lawrence grade was also assessed. No significant differences in background factors between the two groups were observed. Homogeneity was also found in term of preoperative Lysholm score, IKDC, and KT-2000 between SB and DB groups. After 6 months from surgery, both groups showed significant improvements for Lysholm, IKDC, and KT-2000 score with respect to preoperative observations (p < 0.001); however, no significant differences have been observed in term of postoperative values between SB and DB groups at each time point (6-year evaluation: Lysholm score 98.14 ± 10.03 and 97.22 ± 12.82; IKDC normal + nearly normal 95 and 100%; KT-2000 1.68 ± 1.26 and 1.03 ± 1.92 for SB and DB, respectively; all p > 0.05). At the final follow-up, three patients (11.11%) in the DB group and two patients (7.69%) in the SB group presented signs of OA progression. Our study did not reveal any advantages in using DB ACL reconstruction in mid- to long-term follow-up in term of clinical outcome and knee stability, as well as in term of OA progression. Thieme Medical Publishers 333 Seventh Avenue, New York, NY 10001, USA.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28219088     DOI: 10.1055/s-0037-1598176

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Knee Surg        ISSN: 1538-8506            Impact factor:   2.757


  9 in total

1.  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 2.  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

Review 3.  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

4.  Minimal Ablation of the Tibial Stump Using Bony Landmarks Improved Stability and Synovial Coverage Following Double-Bundle Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction.

Authors:  Yuya Kodama; Takayuki Furumatsu; Tomohito Hino; Yusuke Kamatsuki; Toshifumi Ozaki
Journal:  Knee Surg Relat Res       Date:  2018-12-01

Review 5.  Double bundle ACL reconstruction leads to better restoration of knee laxity and subjective outcomes than single bundle ACL reconstruction.

Authors:  Arttu Seppänen; Piia Suomalainen; Heini Huhtala; Heikki Mäenpää; Tommi Kiekara; Timo Järvelä
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2021-09-30       Impact factor: 4.114

Review 6.  Anterior cruciate ligament repair - past, present and future.

Authors:  Piyush Mahapatra; Saman Horriat; Bobby S Anand
Journal:  J Exp Orthop       Date:  2018-06-15

7.  Long term results after double and single bundle ACL reconstruction: Is there any difference? A meta - analysis of randomized controlled trials.

Authors:  Zhenyue Dong; Yingzhen Niu; Jianchao Qi; Yifan Song; Fei Wang
Journal:  Acta Orthop Traumatol Turc       Date:  2019-01-25       Impact factor: 1.511

8.  A retrospective study to compare the clinical effects of individualized anatomic single- and double-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction surgery.

Authors:  Kang Chen; Weimin Zhu; Yizi Zheng; Fangjie Zhang; Kan Ouyang; Liangquan Peng; Haifeng Liu; Wenzhe Feng; Yong Huang; Greg Zhang; Zhenhan Deng; Wei Lu
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2020-09-07       Impact factor: 4.379

9.  Subjective assessment reported by patients shows differences between single-bundle and double-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction, systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Antonio Maestro; Irene Herruzo; David Varillas-Delgado; Carlos Martín-Saborido
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2021-07-28       Impact factor: 4.379

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.