Tags

Type your tag names separated by a space and hit enter

Evaluation and comparison of clinical results of femoral fixation devices in arthroscopic anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction.
Knee 2016; 23(2):227-32KNEE

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Several femoral fixation devices are available for hamstring tendon autograft in anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction, but the best technique is debatable.

PURPOSE

We hypothesised that different suspensory femoral fixation techniques have no superiority over each other. The aim of this study was to evaluate and compare the clinical results of different suspensory femoral fixation devices in arthroscopic ACL reconstruction.

STUDY DESIGN

This was a Level III, retrospective, comparative study.

METHODS

A total of 100 consecutive patients who underwent arthroscopic ACL reconstruction in a single institution with a mean follow-up time of 40 months (12-67 months) were divided into three groups according to femoral fixation devices as 'Endobutton' (n=34), 'Transfix' (n=35) and 'Aperfix' (n=31). The length of painful period after surgery, time to return to work and sporting activities, final range of motion, anterior drawer and Lachman tests, knee instability symptoms, International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) subjective knee evaluation score, Short Form 36 (SF-36) score, Lysholm knee score and Tegner point of the patients were evaluated and compared between groups.

RESULTS

There were no significant differences between the groups. All techniques led to significant recovery in knee instability tests and symptoms.

CONCLUSION

In this study, the clinical results of different suspensory femoral fixation techniques were found to be similar. We believe that different femoral fixation techniques have no effect on clinical results provided that the technique is correctly applied. The surgeon must choose a technique appropriate to his or her experience.

Authors+Show Affiliations

Department of Orthopaedics and Traumatology, Near East University Faculty of Medicine, Nicosia, Cyprus. Electronic address: denizayd@yahoo.com.Department of Orthopaedics and Traumatology, Trakya University Faculty of Medicine, Edirne, Turkey. Electronic address: mertozcan@trakya.edu.tr.

Pub Type(s)

Journal Article

Language

eng

PubMed ID

25937093

Citation

Aydin, Deniz, and Mert Ozcan. "Evaluation and Comparison of Clinical Results of Femoral Fixation Devices in Arthroscopic Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction." The Knee, vol. 23, no. 2, 2016, pp. 227-32.
Aydin D, Ozcan M. Evaluation and comparison of clinical results of femoral fixation devices in arthroscopic anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Knee. 2016;23(2):227-32.
Aydin, D., & Ozcan, M. (2016). Evaluation and comparison of clinical results of femoral fixation devices in arthroscopic anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. The Knee, 23(2), pp. 227-32. doi:10.1016/j.knee.2015.04.004.
Aydin D, Ozcan M. Evaluation and Comparison of Clinical Results of Femoral Fixation Devices in Arthroscopic Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction. Knee. 2016;23(2):227-32. PubMed PMID: 25937093.
* Article titles in AMA citation format should be in sentence-case
TY - JOUR T1 - Evaluation and comparison of clinical results of femoral fixation devices in arthroscopic anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. AU - Aydin,Deniz, AU - Ozcan,Mert, Y1 - 2015/05/01/ PY - 2014/12/18/received PY - 2015/03/23/revised PY - 2015/04/15/accepted PY - 2015/5/5/entrez PY - 2015/5/6/pubmed PY - 2017/1/11/medline KW - Anterior cruciate ligament KW - Arthroscopic reconstruction KW - Clinical results KW - Femoral fixation SP - 227 EP - 32 JF - The Knee JO - Knee VL - 23 IS - 2 N2 - BACKGROUND: Several femoral fixation devices are available for hamstring tendon autograft in anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction, but the best technique is debatable. PURPOSE: We hypothesised that different suspensory femoral fixation techniques have no superiority over each other. The aim of this study was to evaluate and compare the clinical results of different suspensory femoral fixation devices in arthroscopic ACL reconstruction. STUDY DESIGN: This was a Level III, retrospective, comparative study. METHODS: A total of 100 consecutive patients who underwent arthroscopic ACL reconstruction in a single institution with a mean follow-up time of 40 months (12-67 months) were divided into three groups according to femoral fixation devices as 'Endobutton' (n=34), 'Transfix' (n=35) and 'Aperfix' (n=31). The length of painful period after surgery, time to return to work and sporting activities, final range of motion, anterior drawer and Lachman tests, knee instability symptoms, International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) subjective knee evaluation score, Short Form 36 (SF-36) score, Lysholm knee score and Tegner point of the patients were evaluated and compared between groups. RESULTS: There were no significant differences between the groups. All techniques led to significant recovery in knee instability tests and symptoms. CONCLUSION: In this study, the clinical results of different suspensory femoral fixation techniques were found to be similar. We believe that different femoral fixation techniques have no effect on clinical results provided that the technique is correctly applied. The surgeon must choose a technique appropriate to his or her experience. SN - 1873-5800 UR - https://www.unboundmedicine.com/medline/citation/25937093/Evaluation_and_comparison_of_clinical_results_of_femoral_fixation_devices_in_arthroscopic_anterior_cruciate_ligament_reconstruction_ L2 - https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0968-0160(15)00070-8 DB - PRIME DP - Unbound Medicine ER -