0
Articles   |    
Arthroscopically Assisted Reconstruction of the Anterior Cruciate Ligament. A Prospective Randomized Analysis of Three Techniques*
DANIEL B. O'NEILL, M.D.†, NASSAU BAY, TEXAS
View Disclosures and Other Information
Investigation performed at St. John Sports Medicine Center, Nassau Bay
J Bone Joint Surg Am, 1996 Jun 01;78(6):803-13
5 Recommendations (Recommend) | 3 Comments | Saved by 3 Users Save Case

Abstract

One hundred and twenty-seven patients who had a rupture of the anterior cruciate ligament agreed to participate in a prospective, randomized study of three arthroscopically assisted reconstruction techniques. One hundred and twenty-five patients (125 reconstructions) were evaluated after a mean duration of follow-up of forty-two months (range, two to five years).Group I included forty patients who had a two-incision reconstruction with use of an autogenous semitendinosus-gracilis graft, group II consisted of forty patients who had a two-incision reconstruction with use of an autogenous patellar-ligament graft, and group III included forty-five patients who had a single-incision reconstruction (endoscopic technique) with use of an autogenous patellar-ligament graft. The male-female ratio, age range, level of athletic activity, interval between the injury and the reconstruction, previous operative procedures, and associated injuries were similar in all three groups. The same postoperative rehabilitation protocol was followed for all patients.Testing with a KT-2000 arthrometer at maximum manual force was done at the follow-up evaluation; the difference in laxity between the involved knee and the contralateral knee was three millimeters or less in thirty-three patients (83 per cent) in group I, thirty-seven patients (93 per cent) in group II, and thirty-nine patients (87 per cent) in group III. A difference of two millimeters or less was found in thirty patients (75 per cent) in group I, thirty-one patients (78 per cent) in group II, and thirty-five patients (78 per cent) in group III. Thirty-five patients (88 per cent) in group I, thirty-eight patients (95 per cent) in group II, and forty patients (89 per cent) in group III returned to at least the same level of athletic activity. Four grafts (two in group I and two in group II) failed as a result of trauma. There was one additional failure in groups I and III, as evidenced by a difference of nine and seven millimeters, respectively, on instrumented testing of laxity.The significant findings were that no knee was rated D according to the system of the International Knee Documentation Committee (p < 0.002, 94 per cent confidence level) and that fewer additional operative procedures were done on patients in group III (p < 0.08). Also, it was found that the patients in group II returned to a greater level of athletic activity (p < 0.02) and that a higher percentage of the patients in this group had a difference of three millimeters or less on testing with the KT-2000 arthrometer than in the other two groups (p < 0.08).However, with the numbers available, there were no significant differences in the over-all outcome among the three groups (p < 0.1). Importantly, the rate of failure was not greater and the outcomes were not less satisfactory for the late reconstructions than they were for the acute reconstructions (those performed less than three weeks after the injury), including those done with an autogenous semitendinosus-gracilis graft in a chronically unstable knee.

Figures in this Article
    Sign In to Your Personal ProfileSign In To Access Full Content
    Not a Subscriber?
    Get online access for 30 days for $35
    New to JBJS?
    Sign up for a full subscription to both the print and online editions
    Register for a FREE limited account to get full access to all CME activities, to comment on public articles, or to sign up for alerts.
    Register for a FREE limited account to get full access to all CME activities
    Have a subscription to the print edition?
    Current subscribers to The Journal of Bone & Joint Surgery in either the print or quarterly DVD formats receive free online access to JBJS.org.
    Forgot your password?
    Enter your username and email address. We'll send you a reminder to the email address on record.

     
    Forgot your username or need assistance? Please contact customer service at subs@jbjs.org. If your access is provided
    by your institution, please contact you librarian or administrator for username and password information. Institutional
    administrators, to reset your institution's master username or password, please contact subs@jbjs.org

    References

    Accreditation Statement
    These activities have been planned and implemented in accordance with the Essential Areas and policies of the Accreditation Council for Continuing Medical Education (ACCME) through the joint sponsorship of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons and The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery, Inc. The American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons is accredited by the ACCME to provide continuing medical education for physicians.
    CME Activities Associated with This Article
    Submit a Comment
    Please read the other comments before you post yours. Contributors must reveal any conflict of interest.
    Comments are moderated and will appear on the site at the discretion of JBJS editorial staff.

    * = Required Field
    (if multiple authors, separate names by comma)
    Example: John Doe





    Related Content
    The Journal of Bone & Joint Surgery
    JBJS Case Connector
    Topic Collections
    Related Audio and Videos
    PubMed Articles
    Clinical Trials
    Readers of This Also Read...
    JBJS Jobs
    01/08/2014
    Pennsylvania - Penn State Milton S. Hershey Medical Center
    03/19/2014
    Virginia - VIRGINIA COMMONWEALTH UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER
    04/16/2014
    Ohio - OhioHealth Research and Innovation Institute (OHRI)