Andrea Pautasso1, Marcello Capella2, Luca Barberis3, Luca Drocco2, Riccardo Giai Via3, Alessandro Bistolfi2, Alessandro Massè3,2, Luigi Sabatini2. 1. University of Turin, Via Gianfranco Zuretti 29, 10126, Turin, Italy. andrea009@alice.it. 2. Orthopaedic and Traumatology Department, Orthopaedic and Trauma Center, Città della Salute e della Scienza, University of Turin, Via Gianfranco Zuretti 29, 10126, Turin, Italy. 3. University of Turin, Via Gianfranco Zuretti 29, 10126, Turin, Italy.
Abstract
PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to define the subjective and objective clinical results of all-inside surgical technique at a medium-term follow-up and to compare these results with those obtained from antero-medial (AM) ACL reconstruction technique using hamstrings (HS) or bone-patellar tendon-bone (BpTB) grafts to detect eventual superiority of one technique to another. METHODS: A retrospective analysis of routinely collected data was conducted. Inclusion criteria were ACL reconstruction through all-inside technique or AM technique with HS or BpTB performed between January 2015 and May 2018; age between 15 and 30 year old; minimum 24 months' available follow-up. Exclusion criteria were contralateral ACL reconstruction; need for any other associated procedures during surgery. Clinical outcomes were assessed with KOOS, Lysholm, Tegner scores and KT-1000 device. RESULTS: According to the selection criteria, 157 patients were enrolled and divided subsequently into 3 groups: all-inside (51 patients), AM-HS (53 patients) and AM-BpTB (53 patients). A significant postoperative improvement of each score in all groups was detected. The mean KT-1000 was 3.1 ± 1.0 mm in all-inside group, while 3.3 ± 1.4 mm and 2.5 ± 0.4 mm in AM-HS and AM-BpTB groups, respectively. Comparing the results obtained, no statistically significant difference was found between the three techniques (p = 0.27). Statistically significant differences were highlighted in surgical duration: all-inside method was the longest (117'), followed by AM-BpTB surgery (101') and AM-HS technique (87'). CONCLUSIONS: The all-inside technique showed good postoperative results at medium-term follow-up. It could be a valuable solution for ACL reconstruction, especially in young patients due to its less invasiveness, despite surgical skills and time needed. LEVELS OF EVIDENCE: Level IV.
PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to define the subjective and objective clinical results of all-inside surgical technique at a medium-term follow-up and to compare these results with those obtained from antero-medial (AM) ACL reconstruction technique using hamstrings (HS) or bone-patellar tendon-bone (BpTB) grafts to detect eventual superiority of one technique to another. METHODS: A retrospective analysis of routinely collected data was conducted. Inclusion criteria were ACL reconstruction through all-inside technique or AM technique with HS or BpTB performed between January 2015 and May 2018; age between 15 and 30 year old; minimum 24 months' available follow-up. Exclusion criteria were contralateral ACL reconstruction; need for any other associated procedures during surgery. Clinical outcomes were assessed with KOOS, Lysholm, Tegner scores and KT-1000 device. RESULTS: According to the selection criteria, 157 patients were enrolled and divided subsequently into 3 groups: all-inside (51 patients), AM-HS (53 patients) and AM-BpTB (53 patients). A significant postoperative improvement of each score in all groups was detected. The mean KT-1000 was 3.1 ± 1.0 mm in all-inside group, while 3.3 ± 1.4 mm and 2.5 ± 0.4 mm in AM-HS and AM-BpTB groups, respectively. Comparing the results obtained, no statistically significant difference was found between the three techniques (p = 0.27). Statistically significant differences were highlighted in surgical duration: all-inside method was the longest (117'), followed by AM-BpTB surgery (101') and AM-HS technique (87'). CONCLUSIONS: The all-inside technique showed good postoperative results at medium-term follow-up. It could be a valuable solution for ACL reconstruction, especially in young patients due to its less invasiveness, despite surgical skills and time needed. LEVELS OF EVIDENCE: Level IV.
Authors: Horea Benea; Henri d'Astorg; Shahnaz Klouche; Thomas Bauer; Gheorghe Tomoaia; Philippe Hardy Journal: Knee Date: 2013-10-05 Impact factor: 2.199
Authors: Clare L Ardern; Philip Glasgow; Anthony Schneiders; Erik Witvrouw; Benjamin Clarsen; Ann Cools; Boris Gojanovic; Steffan Griffin; Karim M Khan; Håvard Moksnes; Stephen A Mutch; Nicola Phillips; Gustaaf Reurink; Robin Sadler; Karin Grävare Silbernagel; Kristian Thorborg; Arnlaug Wangensteen; Kevin E Wilk; Mario Bizzini Journal: Br J Sports Med Date: 2016-05-25 Impact factor: 13.800
Authors: Toan D Duong; Dung T Tran; Bich N T Do; Tai T Nguyen; Son M Le; Ha H Le Journal: Asia Pac J Sports Med Arthrosc Rehabil Technol Date: 2022-07-01