Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Adjustable-Loop Cortical Suspensory Fixation Results in Greater Tibial Tunnel Widening Compared to Interference Screw Fixation in Primary Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction.
Lee, Tae-Jin; Jang, Ki-Mo; Kim, Tae-Jin; Lee, Sang-Min; Bae, Ji-Hoon.
Afiliação
  • Lee TJ; Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Korea University Guro Hospital, Korea University College of Medicine, Seoul 08308, Korea.
  • Jang KM; Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Korea University Anam Hospital, Korea University College of Medicine, Seoul 02841, Korea.
  • Kim TJ; Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Korea University Guro Hospital, Korea University College of Medicine, Seoul 08308, Korea.
  • Lee SM; Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Korea University Guro Hospital, Korea University College of Medicine, Seoul 08308, Korea.
  • Bae JH; Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Korea University Guro Hospital, Korea University College of Medicine, Seoul 08308, Korea.
Medicina (Kaunas) ; 58(9)2022 Sep 01.
Article em En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36143870
Background: Although the use of adjustable-loop suspensory fixation has increased in recent years, the influence of the shortcomings of suspensory fixation, such as the bungee-cord or windshield-wiper effects, on tunnel widening remains to be clarified. Hypothesis/Purpose: The purpose of this study was to compare adjustable-loop femoral cortical suspensory fixation and interference screw fixation in terms of tunnel widening and clinical outcomes after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR). We hypothesized that tunnel widening in the adjustable-loop femoral cortical suspensory fixation (AL) group would be comparable to that in the interference screw fixation (IF) group. Methods: This study evaluated patients who underwent primary ACLR at our institution between March 2015 and June 2019. The femoral and tibial tunnel diameters were measured using plain radiographs in the immediate postoperative period and 2 years after ACLR. Tunnel widening and clinical outcomes (Lysholm score, 2000 International Knee Documentation Committee subjective score, and Tegner activity level) were compared between the two groups. Results: There were 48 patients (mean age, 29.8 ± 12.0 years) in the AL group and 44 patients (mean age, 26.0 ± 9.5 years) in the IF group. Tunnel widening was significantly greater in the AL group than that in the IF group at the tibia anteroposterior (AP) middle (2.03 mm vs. 1.32 mm, p = 0.017), tibia AP distal (1.52 mm vs. 0.84 mm, p = 0.012), tibia lateral proximal (1.85 mm vs. 1.00 mm, p = 0.001), tibia lateral middle (2.36 mm vs. 1.03 mm, p < 0.001), and tibia lateral distal (2.34 mm vs. 0.85 mm, p < 0.001) levels. There were no significant differences between the two groups with respect to femoral tunnel widening and clinical outcomes. Conclusions: Tibial tunnel widening was significantly greater in the AL group than in the IF group at 2 years after primary ACLR. However, the clinical outcomes in the two groups were comparable at 2 years.
Assuntos
Palavras-chave

Texto completo: 1 Coleções: 01-internacional Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Reconstrução do Ligamento Cruzado Anterior / Lesões do Ligamento Cruzado Anterior Limite: Adolescent / Adult / Humans Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2022 Tipo de documento: Article

Texto completo: 1 Coleções: 01-internacional Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Reconstrução do Ligamento Cruzado Anterior / Lesões do Ligamento Cruzado Anterior Limite: Adolescent / Adult / Humans Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2022 Tipo de documento: Article