Richard Volz1, Gudrun H Borchert2. 1. Joint Practice Renz' Volz and Loewe, Center for Specialized Joint Surgery, Haegerstraße 4, 88662, Ueberlingen, Germany. R.Volz@gelenkchirurgie.de. 2. Dr. Borchert Medical Information Management, Egelsbacher Str. 39e, 63225, Langen, Germany.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: There is currently no consensus regarding the preferred surgical procedure for the reconstruction of anterior cruciate ligament (ACL). The interference screw technique is widely used, but has been associated with a risk of graft damage. The Press-Fit-Hybrid®-technique is one of the alternatives for biological ACL-reconstruction with minimal implant requirements. The hypothesis of this retrospective analysis is, that the Press-Fit-Hybrid®-technique leads to better results with respect to re-rupture rate and secondary meniscal lesion than the interference-screw-technique. METHODS: To compare the re-rupture rate of the interference-screw-technique (IF) used until 2015 with the currently used Press-Fit-Hybrid®-technique (PFH), the last 100 patients of the IF-group and the first 100 patients of the PFH-group were retrospectively analyzed. Primary outcomes were re-rupture rate, complications and secondary meniscal injury. Additionally, laxity, Lachman and Pivot-shift and range of motion were evaluated. RESULTS: A mean follow-up of 4.2 and 5.3 years revealed 4% and 9% re-rupture rates and 1% and 2% complication rates in the PFH- and IF-group, respectively. In the PFH-group there were no re-ruptures in patients older than 23 years. Secondary meniscal injury post-surgery was 6% and 9% for the PFH and IF-group, respectively. Knee stability was similar in both groups. Range of motion was significantly better in the PFH-group, with 136° of flexion, 6 months after surgery. CONCLUSION: For ACL-reconstruction the Press-Fit-Hybrid®-technique is an alternative new method. Low level of secondary meniscal lesions after surgery and high stability, is known to prevent later arthrosis of the knee. The encouraging observed trend of the reduction of the re-rupture rate in revision surgery and in young patients using the Press-Fit-Hybrid®-technique in comparison to the interference-screw-technique must be confirmed with further studies. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic Level III, retrospective cohort study.
BACKGROUND: There is currently no consensus regarding the preferred surgical procedure for the reconstruction of anterior cruciate ligament (ACL). The interference screw technique is widely used, but has been associated with a risk of graft damage. The Press-Fit-Hybrid®-technique is one of the alternatives for biological ACL-reconstruction with minimal implant requirements. The hypothesis of this retrospective analysis is, that the Press-Fit-Hybrid®-technique leads to better results with respect to re-rupture rate and secondary meniscal lesion than the interference-screw-technique. METHODS: To compare the re-rupture rate of the interference-screw-technique (IF) used until 2015 with the currently used Press-Fit-Hybrid®-technique (PFH), the last 100 patients of the IF-group and the first 100 patients of the PFH-group were retrospectively analyzed. Primary outcomes were re-rupture rate, complications and secondary meniscal injury. Additionally, laxity, Lachman and Pivot-shift and range of motion were evaluated. RESULTS: A mean follow-up of 4.2 and 5.3 years revealed 4% and 9% re-rupture rates and 1% and 2% complication rates in the PFH- and IF-group, respectively. In the PFH-group there were no re-ruptures in patients older than 23 years. Secondary meniscal injury post-surgery was 6% and 9% for the PFH and IF-group, respectively. Knee stability was similar in both groups. Range of motion was significantly better in the PFH-group, with 136° of flexion, 6 months after surgery. CONCLUSION: For ACL-reconstruction the Press-Fit-Hybrid®-technique is an alternative new method. Low level of secondary meniscal lesions after surgery and high stability, is known to prevent later arthrosis of the knee. The encouraging observed trend of the reduction of the re-rupture rate in revision surgery and in young patients using the Press-Fit-Hybrid®-technique in comparison to the interference-screw-technique must be confirmed with further studies. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic Level III, retrospective cohort study.
Authors: Peter N Chalmers; Nathan A Mall; Mario Moric; Seth L Sherman; George P Paletta; Brian J Cole; Bernard R Bach Journal: J Bone Joint Surg Am Date: 2014-02-19 Impact factor: 5.284
Authors: Ralph Akoto; Jonas Müller-Hübenthal; Maurice Balke; Malte Albers; Bertil Bouillon; Philip Helm; Marc Banerjee; Jürgen Höher Journal: BMC Musculoskelet Disord Date: 2015-08-19 Impact factor: 2.362