Literature DB >> 35737010

Adjustable-loop implants are non-inferior to fixed-loop implants for femoral fixation in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction.

Simone B Elmholt1, Torsten G Nielsen2, Martin Lind2.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: Button implants with an adjustable-loop device (ALD) are often used in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR). Clinical research comparing ALDs with fixed-loop devices (FLD) has mainly been conducted in small patient populations with short follow-up times. To determine whether ALDs are safe to use in ACLR, a non-inferiority study with a large sample population and a long follow-up period would be beneficial. This study compared ALDs with FLDs to determine non-inferior revision surgery rates, knee stability, and patient-reported outcomes (PROM) in ACLRs.
METHODS: This non-inferiority register-based cohort study was conducted using data from the Danish Knee Ligament Reconstruction Registry (DKRR). A total of 12,723 patients > 15 years of age with primary ACLR using hamstring tendon autografts and either an FLD or ALD for femoral fixation were included: 9719 patients were in the FLD group, and 3014 patients were in the ALD group. The primary outcome was revision ACLR with a non-inferiority margin for ALDs at 4% at the 2-year follow-up. The secondary outcomes were anterior and rotatory knee stability and PROMs based on the Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) at the 1-year follow-up.
RESULTS: The crude cumulative revision rates in ALD implants at 2 and 5 years were 2.1% (95% CI 1.62-2.68) and 5.0% (95% CI 4.22-5.96), respectively. In the FLD group, the rates were 2.2% (95% CI 1.89-2.48) at 2 years and 4.7% (95% CI 4.31-5.20) at 5 years. The 1-year side-to-side differences were 0.97 mm (95% CI 0.90-1.03) in the ALD group and 1.45 mm (95% CI 1.41-1.49) in the FLD group. In the FLD group, 13% had a positive pivot shift, and in the ALD group, 6% had a positive pivot shift. There were no differences in KOOS.
CONCLUSION: ALDs were non-inferior to FLDs regarding revision rates, knee stability, and patient-reported outcomes. Based on this conclusion, ALDs are safe to use for femoral fixation in ACLR. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III.
© 2022. The Author(s) under exclusive licence to European Society of Sports Traumatology, Knee Surgery, Arthroscopy (ESSKA).

Entities:  

Keywords:  Adjustable-loop device; Anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction; Fixed-loop device; Hamstring graft; Revision surgery

Year:  2022        PMID: 35737010     DOI: 10.1007/s00167-022-07034-y

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


  46 in total

1.  Femoral suspension devices for anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: do adjustable loops lengthen?

Authors:  Aaron E Barrow; Marcello Pilia; Teja Guda; Warren R Kadrmas; Travis C Burns
Journal:  Am J Sports Med       Date:  2013-10-24       Impact factor: 6.202

2.  Does adjustable-loop femoral cortical suspension loosen after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction? A retrospective comparative study.

Authors:  Matthew J Boyle; Tyler J Vovos; Cameron G Walker; Kathryne J Stabile; Jonathan M Roth; William E Garrett
Journal:  Knee       Date:  2015-05-19       Impact factor: 2.199

3.  Comparison of Clinical and Radiologic Outcomes and Second-Look Arthroscopic Findings After Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction Using Fixed and Adjustable Loop Cortical Suspension Devices.

Authors:  Hyeon Wook Ahn; Jong Keun Seon; Eun Kyoo Song; Chan Jin Park; Hong An Lim
Journal:  Arthroscopy       Date:  2019-05-06       Impact factor: 4.772

4.  Clinical and Radiological Outcomes After Hamstring Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstructions: Comparison Between Fixed-Loop and Adjustable-Loop Cortical Suspension Devices.

Authors:  Nam-Hong Choi; Bong-Seok Yang; Brian N Victoroff
Journal:  Am J Sports Med       Date:  2016-11-25       Impact factor: 6.202

5.  Adjustable loop ACL suspension devices demonstrate less reliability in terms of reproducibility and irreversible displacement.

Authors:  Sufian S Ahmad; Michael T Hirschmann; Benjamin Voumard; Sandro Kohl; Philippe Zysset; Takura Mukabeta; Dimitrios S Evangelopoulos; Atesch Ateschrang
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2017-11-09       Impact factor: 4.342

6.  A Comparative Biomechanical Study of Femoral Cortical Suspension Devices for Soft-Tissue Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: Adjustable-Length Loop Versus Fixed-Length Loop.

Authors:  Moon Jong Chang; Tae Soo Bae; Young-Wan Moon; Jin Hwan Ahn; Joon Ho Wang
Journal:  Arthroscopy       Date:  2017-11-13       Impact factor: 4.772

7.  Hamstring graft diameter above 7 mm has a lower risk of failure following anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction.

Authors:  Abdulaziz Z Alomar; Ahmad S Bin Nasser; Arvind Kumar; Mukesh Kumar; Saubhik Das; Samarth Mittal
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2021-02-23       Impact factor: 4.342

8.  Magnetic Resonance Imaging and Clinical Results of Outside-in Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: A Comparison of Fixed- and Adjustable-Length Loop Cortical Fixation.

Authors:  Jin Hwan Ahn; Taeg Su Ko; Yong Seuk Lee; Hwa Jae Jeong; Jong Kuen Park
Journal:  Clin Orthop Surg       Date:  2018-05-18

9.  Passive Knee Stability After Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction Using the Endobutton or ToggleLoc With ZipLoop as a Femoral Fixation Device: A Comparison of 1654 Patients From the Danish Knee Ligament Reconstruction Registry.

Authors:  Christian Asmus Peter Asmussen; Mikkel Lindegaard Attrup; Kristian Thorborg; Per Hölmich
Journal:  Orthop J Sports Med       Date:  2018-06-14

10.  A prospective randomized study of arthroscopic ACL reconstruction with adjustable- versus fixed-loop device for femoral side fixation.

Authors:  Naiyer Asif; Mohammad Jesan Khan; K P Haris; Shah Waliullah; Anubhav Sharma; Danish Firoz
Journal:  Knee Surg Relat Res       Date:  2021-12-04
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.