ABSTRACT
Objective To compare the functional outcomes of anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction with hamstring autograft (HA) through the all-inside (AI) technique with adjustable-loop cortical Endobutton (Smith & Nephew, Watford, Hertfordshire, England) on the sides of the femur and tibia and through the outside-in (OI) technique using an interference screw on the tibial side and a cortical Endobutton on the femoral side. Materials and Methods The present is a double-blinded randomized controlled trial (RCT) of 44 patients undergoing arthroscopic ACL reconstruction from February 2019 to February 2022 in a tertiary care hospital. As per computer-based randomization, the patients were distributed into two groups: the AI and OI groups. Both groups were evaluated for 12 months using the Visual Analog Scale (VAS), the Lysholm Knee Scoring Scale, and part I (pain score) and part II (function score) of the Knee Society Score (KSS). Results On postoperative day 2, the VAS score was significantly higher in the OI group ( p = 0.0001), but insignificant ( p = 0.807) at 6 weeks. At 3, 6, and 12 months of follow-up, the score on the Lysholm Knee Scoring Scale was significantly higher ( p = 0.001) in the AI group. At 6 months, both parts of the KSS showed a significant difference, with the AI group presenting a better outcome ( p = 0.04). However, at 12 months, the AI group presented a better score on part I of the KSS, but no differences were observed regarding part II. Conclusion In a follow-up of 12 months, the patients submitted to the AI technique presented better outcome scores and pain relief than those submitted to the OI technique.
ABSTRACT
Abstract Objective To compare the functional outcomes of anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction with hamstring autograft (HA) through the all-inside (AI) technique with adjustable-loop cortical Endobutton (Smith & Nephew, Watford, Hertfordshire, England) on the sides of the femur and tibia and through the outside-in (OI) technique using an interference screw on the tibial side and a cortical Endobutton on the femoral side. Materials and Methods The present is a double-blinded randomized controlled trial (RCT) of 44 patients undergoing arthroscopic ACL reconstruction from February 2019 to February 2022 in a tertiary care hospital. As per computer-based randomization, the patients were distributed into two groups: the AI and OI groups. Both groups were evaluated for 12 months using the Visual Analog Scale (VAS), the Lysholm Knee Scoring Scale, and part I (pain score) and part II (function score) of the Knee Society Score (KSS). Results On postoperative day 2,the VAS score was significantly higher in the OI group (p = 0.0001), but insignificant (p = 0.807) at 6 weeks. At 3, 6, and 12 months of follow-up, the score on the Lysholm Knee Scoring Scale was significantly higher (p = 0.001) in the AI group. At 6 months, both parts of the KSS showed a significant difference, with the AI group presenting a better outcome (p = 0.04). However, at 12 months, the AI group presented a better score on part I of the KSS, but no differences were observed regarding part II. Conclusion In a follow-up of 12 months, the patients submitted to the AI technique presented better outcome scores and pain relief than those submitted to the OI technique.
Resumo Objetivo Comparar os resultados funcionais da reconstrução do ligamento cruzado anterior (LCA) com autoenxerto de isquiotibiais pela técnica all-inside (AI) com Endobutton (Smith & Nephew, Watford, Hertfordshire, Inglaterra) cortical de alça ajustável nos lados do fêmur e da tíbia e pela técnica outside-in (OI) com parafuso de interferência no lado tibial e Endobutton cortical no lado femoral. Métodos Trata-se de um ensaio clínico controlado, randomizado e duplo-cego com 44 pacientes submetidos à reconstrução artroscópica do LCA de fevereiro de 2019 a fevereiro de 2022 em um hospital de cuidados terciários. De acordo com a randomização por computador, os pacientes foram distribuídos em dois grupos: AI e OI. Ambos os grupos foram avaliados durante 12 meses pela Escala Visual Analógica (EVA), a Escala de Pontuação do Joelho de Lysholm e pela parte I (pontuação de dor) e a parte II (pontuação de função) da escala Knee Society Score (KSS). Resultados No segundo dia de pós-operatório, a pontuação média na EVA foi significativamente maior no grupo OI (p = 0,0001), mas insignificante (p 0,807) às 6 semanas. Aos 3, 6 e 12 meses de acompanhamento, a pontuação na Escala de Lysholm (p = 0,001) foi significativamente maior no grupo AI. Aos 6 meses, ambas as partes da KSS apresentam uma diferença significativa, com o grupo AI apresentando um desfecho melhor (p = 0,04). No entanto, aos 12 meses, o grupo AI apresentou uma pontuação melhor na parte I da KSS, mas não foram observadas diferenças na parte II. Conclusão Em um acompanhamento de 12 meses, os pacientes submetidos à técnica AI apresentaram melhores pontuações de desfecho e alívio da dor do que aqueles submetidos à técnica OI.