Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction is associated with greater tibial tunnel widening when using a bioabsorbable screw compared to an all-inside technique with suspensory fixation.
Monaco, Edoardo; Fabbri, Mattia; Redler, Andrea; Gaj, Edoardo; De Carli, Angelo; Argento, Giuseppe; Saithna, Adnan; Ferretti, Andrea.
Afiliação
  • Monaco E; Orthopaedic Unit and Kirk Kilgour Sports Injury Center, S. Andrea Hospital, University of Rome "Sapienza", Via di Grottarossa 1035-1039, 00189, Rome, Italy. edoardomonaco76@gmail.com.
  • Fabbri M; Orthopaedic Unit and Kirk Kilgour Sports Injury Center, S. Andrea Hospital, University of Rome "Sapienza", Via di Grottarossa 1035-1039, 00189, Rome, Italy.
  • Redler A; Orthopaedic Unit and Kirk Kilgour Sports Injury Center, S. Andrea Hospital, University of Rome "Sapienza", Via di Grottarossa 1035-1039, 00189, Rome, Italy.
  • Gaj E; Orthopaedic Unit and Kirk Kilgour Sports Injury Center, S. Andrea Hospital, University of Rome "Sapienza", Via di Grottarossa 1035-1039, 00189, Rome, Italy.
  • De Carli A; Orthopaedic Unit and Kirk Kilgour Sports Injury Center, S. Andrea Hospital, University of Rome "Sapienza", Via di Grottarossa 1035-1039, 00189, Rome, Italy.
  • Argento G; Department of radiology, S. Andrea Hospital, University of Rome "Sapienza", Rome, Italy.
  • Saithna A; Southport and Ormskirk Hospitals NHS Trust, Town Lane, Southport, England, UK.
  • Ferretti A; Orthopaedic Unit and Kirk Kilgour Sports Injury Center, S. Andrea Hospital, University of Rome "Sapienza", Via di Grottarossa 1035-1039, 00189, Rome, Italy.
Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc ; 27(8): 2577-2584, 2019 Aug.
Article em En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30406408
PURPOSE: To compare clinical outcomes and tunnel widening following anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) performed with an all-inside technique (Group A) or with a bioabsorbable tibial screw and suspensory femoral fixation (Group B). METHODS: Tunnel widening was assessed using computed tomography (CT) and a previously validated analytical best fit cylinder technique at approximately 1-year following ACLR. Clinical follow-up comprised evaluation with IKDC, KSS, Tegner, Lysholm scores, and knee laxity assessment. RESULTS: The study population comprised 22 patients in each group with a median clinical follow-up of 24 months (range 21-27 months). The median duration between ACLR and CT was 13 months (range 12-14 months). There were no significant differences in clinical outcome measures between groups. There were no differences between groups with respect to femoral tunnel widening. However, there was a significantly larger increase in tibial tunnel widening, at the middle portion, in Group B (2.4 ± 1.5 mm) compared to Group A (0.8 ± 0.4 mm) (p = 0.027), and also at the articular portion in Group B (1.5 ± 0.8 mm) compared to Group A (0.8 ± 0.8 mm) (p = 0.027). CONCLUSION: Tibial tunnel widening after ACLR using hamstring tendon autograft is significantly greater with suspensory femoral fixation and a bioabsorbable tibial interference screw when compared to an all-inside technique at a median follow-up of 2 years. The clinical relevance of this work lies in the rebuttal of concerns arising from biomechanical studies regarding the possibility of increased tunnel widening with an all-inside technique. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III.
Assuntos
Palavras-chave

Texto completo: 1 Coleções: 01-internacional Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Tíbia / Reconstrução do Ligamento Cruzado Anterior / Articulação do Joelho Tipo de estudo: Observational_studies / Risk_factors_studies Limite: Adult / Female / Humans / Male Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2019 Tipo de documento: Article

Texto completo: 1 Coleções: 01-internacional Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Tíbia / Reconstrução do Ligamento Cruzado Anterior / Articulação do Joelho Tipo de estudo: Observational_studies / Risk_factors_studies Limite: Adult / Female / Humans / Male Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2019 Tipo de documento: Article