Literature DB >> 29404653

Surgeon experience with dynamic intraligamentary stabilization does not influence risk of failure.

Philipp Henle1, Kathrin S Bieri2, Janosch Haeberli1, Nele Arnout3, Jan Victor3, Mirco Herbort4, Clemens Koesters4, Stefan Eggli1.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: Studies on dynamic intraligamentary stabilization (DIS) of acute anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) ruptures reported failure rates similar to those of conventional ACL reconstruction. This study aimed to determine whether surgeon experience with DIS is associated with revision rates or patient-reported outcomes. The hypothesis was that more experienced surgeons achieved better outcomes following DIS due to substantial learning curve.
METHODS: The authors prospectively enrolled 110 consecutive patients that underwent DIS and evaluated them at a minimum of 2 years. The effects of independent variables (surgeon experience, gender, age, adjuvant procedures, tear location, preinjury Tegner score, time from injury to surgery, and follow-up) on four principal outcomes (revision ACL surgery, any re-operation, IKDC and Lysholm score) were analyzed using univariable and multivariable regressions.
RESULTS: From the 110 patients enrolled, 14 patients (13%) were lost to follow-up. Of the remaining 96 patients, 11 underwent revision ACL surgery, leaving 85 patients for clinical assessment at a mean of 2.2 ± 0.4 years (range 2.0-3.8). Arthroscopic reoperations were performed in 26 (27%) patients, including 11 (11%) revision ACL surgeries. Multivariable regressions revealed: (1) no associations between the reoperation rate and the independent variables, (2) better IKDC scores for 'designer surgeons' (b = 10.7; CI 4.9-16.5; p < 0.001), higher preinjury Tegner scores (b = 2.5, CI 0.8-4.2; p = 0.005), and younger patients (b = 0.3, CI 0.0-0.6; p = 0.039), and (3) better Lysholm scores for 'designer surgeons' (b = 7.8, CI 2.8-12.8; p = 0.005) and preinjury Tegner score (b = 1.9, CI 0.5-3.4; p = 0.010).
CONCLUSION: Surgeon experience with DIS was not associated with rates of revision ACL surgery or general re-operations. Future, larger-scaled studies are needed to confirm these findings. Patients operated by 'designer surgeons' had slightly better IKDC and Lysholm scores, which could be due to better patient selection and/or positively biased attitudes of both surgeons and patients. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level II, prospective comparative study.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Anterior cruciate ligament; Dynamic intraligamentary stabilization; Ligamys; Outcomes; Revision surgery; Surgeon experience

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 29404653     DOI: 10.1007/s00167-018-4847-0

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc        ISSN: 0942-2056            Impact factor:   4.342


  35 in total

1.  Exploring the High Reinjury Rate in Younger Patients Undergoing Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction.

Authors:  Kate E Webster; Julian A Feller
Journal:  Am J Sports Med       Date:  2016-07-07       Impact factor: 6.202

2.  Arterial supply to the human anterior cruciate ligament.

Authors:  B J Toy; R A Yeasting; D E Morse; P McCann
Journal:  J Athl Train       Date:  1995-06       Impact factor: 2.860

3.  Revision Risk After Allograft Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: Association With Graft Processing Techniques, Patient Characteristics, and Graft Type.

Authors:  Samir G Tejwani; Jason Chen; Tadashi T Funahashi; Rebecca Love; Gregory B Maletis
Journal:  Am J Sports Med       Date:  2015-06-11       Impact factor: 6.202

4.  Analyzing and interpreting data from likert-type scales.

Authors:  Gail M Sullivan; Anthony R Artino
Journal:  J Grad Med Educ       Date:  2013-12

5.  Rating systems in the evaluation of knee ligament injuries.

Authors:  Y Tegner; J Lysholm
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  1985-09       Impact factor: 4.176

6.  Dynamic intraligamentary stabilisation: initial experience with treatment of acute ACL ruptures.

Authors:  S Kohl; D S Evangelopoulos; M O Schär; K Bieri; T Müller; S S Ahmad
Journal:  Bone Joint J       Date:  2016-06       Impact factor: 5.082

7.  Patient and surgical characteristics that affect revision risk in dynamic intraligamentary stabilization of the anterior cruciate ligament.

Authors:  Philipp Henle; Kathrin S Bieri; Manuel Brand; Emin Aghayev; Jessica Bettfuehr; Janosch Haeberli; Martina Kess; Stefan Eggli
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2017-05-18       Impact factor: 4.342

8.  Allograft anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction in the young, active patient: Tegner activity level and failure rate.

Authors:  Gene R Barrett; Kurre Luber; William H Replogle; Josie L Manley
Journal:  Arthroscopy       Date:  2010-10-16       Impact factor: 4.772

9.  Patient predictors of early revision surgery after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a cohort study of 16,930 patients with 2-year follow-up.

Authors:  Daniel Andernord; Neel Desai; Haukur Björnsson; Mattias Ylander; Jón Karlsson; Kristian Samuelsson
Journal:  Am J Sports Med       Date:  2014-10-16       Impact factor: 6.202

10.  The effect of anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction on the risk of knee reinjury.

Authors:  Warren R Dunn; Stephen Lyman; Andrew E Lincoln; Paul J Amoroso; Thomas Wickiewicz; Robert G Marx
Journal:  Am J Sports Med       Date:  2004-12       Impact factor: 6.202

View more
  2 in total

1.  Return to Sports: A Risky Business? A Systematic Review with Meta-Analysis of Risk Factors for Graft Rupture Following ACL Reconstruction.

Authors:  Anna Cronström; Eva Tengman; Charlotte K Häger
Journal:  Sports Med       Date:  2022-08-24       Impact factor: 11.928

2.  Comparable Instrumented Knee Joint Laxity and Patient-Reported Outcomes After ACL Repair With Dynamic Intraligamentary Stabilization or ACL Reconstruction: 5-Year Results of a Randomized Controlled Trial.

Authors:  Johannes Glasbrenner; Michael J Raschke; Christoph Kittl; Elmar Herbst; Christian Peez; Thorben Briese; Philipp A Michel; Mirco Herbort; Clemens Kösters; Benedikt Schliemann
Journal:  Am J Sports Med       Date:  2022-08-25       Impact factor: 7.010

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.